SlideShare ist ein Scribd-Unternehmen logo
1 von 27
Downloaden Sie, um offline zu lesen
An Adaptive Evolutionary Algorithm Based
on Non-Euclidean Geometry for Many-
Objective Optimization
Annibale Panichella
a.panichella@tudelf.nl
@AnniPanic
!1
Proximity and Diversity
!2
Convergence
(proximity)
Diversity
(spread)
Crowding distance
NichesGrids
Angle distance
Reference Points
Dominance
Box-dominance
θ-dominance
ε-dominance
The Challenge
• How to measure proximity and diversity depends on the
shape of the Pareto Front
• We don’t know what is the PF shape (geometry) a priori
!3
Elliptic Geometry Hyperbolic Geometry
Pareto Front Modelling
!4
(f1)p+(f2)p+…+(fM)p =1
[Martínez et al. PPSN 2014]
Family of Curves
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1 0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
MOPs with two and three objective functions.
*Image from
p

p
p
p
p
Non-linear fitting
Solved with (iterative)
numerical methods
Pareto Front Modelling
!5
a1(f1) +a2(f2) +…+aM(fM) = K
[Tian et al. IEEE Tans. Cyber. 2018]
p1 p2 pM
a1, a2, …, aM ≥ 0
p1, p2, …, pM ≥ 0
Generalized Fitting Model (GFM)
Complexity:
O(G' *′M2(M + N))
M = #Objectives
N = Pop. Size
G' = #Iterations of the
Levenberg-Marquardt
algorithm
Pareto Front Modelling
!6
Time(s)
0
30
60
90
120
# Objectives
M=3 M=5 M=10 M=15
NSGA-II GFM-MOEA
Problem = DTLZ1
Pop. Size = 200
# Gen. = 300
M = {3, 5, 10, 15}
AGE-MOEA
(Adaptive GEometry-based MOEA)
7
The Framework
!8
An Adaptive Evolutionary Algorithm based on Non-Euclidean Geometry GECCO ’19, July 13–17, 2019, Prague, Czech Republic
Algorithm 1: AGE-MOEA
Input: M: Number of objectives
N : Population size
Result: Final population P
1 begin
2 P RANDOM-POPULATION(N )
3 while not (stop_condition) do
4 Q GENERATE-OFFSPRING(P)
5 F FAST-NONDOMINATED-SORT(P
–
Q)
6 F NORMALIZE(F)
7 p GET-GEOMETRY(F1, M) /* Equation 8 */
8 d 1 /* First non-dominated rank */
9 while | P | + | Fd |6 N do
10 SURVIVAL-SCORE(Fd , d, p)
11 P P
–
Fd
12 d d + 1
13 SORT(Fd ) /* by survival scores */
14 P P
–
Fd [1 : (N |P |)]
15 return P
front. First, we present an overview of the proposed framework
in Section 3.1. Then, we detail the key ingredients of AGE-MOEA in
Sections 3.2, 3.3, and 3.4.
3.1 Overview
Finally, the new population of M solutions is formed by selecting
the solutions from the non-dominated fronts, one front (or level) at
a time. Therefore, the solutions from the rst front F1 are selected
rst, followed by F2, and so on. The procedure terminates when
adding the solutions of the current non-dominated front Fd would
exceed M. In this case, AGE-MOEA selects the remaining solutions
from Fd according to the descending order of their survival scores
(lines 13-14 of Algorithm 1).
The survival scores play an important role during reproduction
as well. Indeed, parents are selected from the current population P
using the binary tournament selection: a pair of solutions is randomly
selected from P; the winner of the tournament is the solution with
the best non-dominated rank (or level) or the solution with the
largest survival score at the same level of non-dominated rank.
3.2 Normalization
The rst non-dominated front F1 is rescaled and normalized by
applying the same formula used in NSGA-III [10]:
f n
i (S) = [(fi (S) zmin
i ]/ai 8S 2 F1 (4)
where fi (S) denotes the objective fi for the solution S and zmin
i is
the minimum value of the i-th objective across all solutions in the
front F1. With the numerator, the objectives are translated to have
the ideal point equal to the origin of the axes. The denominator ai
is the intercept of the M-dimensional hyperplane with the objective
AGE-MOEA inherits the main
framework on NSGA-II. The main
differences are:
1. Normalization
2. A Simple heuristic to
estimate the geometry with
complexity O(M x N)
3. Replacing the crowding
distance with the survival
score (proximity + diversity)
Normalization
!9
Population at gen. t 1. Apply the non-dominated sorting
2. Identify the first front F1
3. Normalize F1 with the formula
fni (S) = [(fi(S) − zmini ]/ai ∀S ∈ F1
ai is the intercept of the M-dimensional
hyperplane with the objective axis fi
4. Normalize the other fronts (F2,
F3) using the values zmini and ai
computed from F1
F1
F2
F3
4
10
(2, 3)
Simplify the Fitting Equation
!10
4
10
1
1
(0,0)
Before Normalization After Normalization
Ideal Point
(1,1)
a1(f1) +a2(f2) +…+aM(fM) =Kp1 p2 pM
(f1) +(f2) +…+(fM) =1p1 p2 pM
(0,0)
Simplify the Fitting Equation
!11
(f1) +(f2) +…+(fM) =1p1 p2 pM
• Exponential equation with
no exact solutions
• We still need numerical
(iterative) methods for fitting
• We want to find the values
p1…pM such that the error of
the fitting is minimum
The Idea
!12
• Don't solve the exponential
equation
• Look at points in the front
for which the equation is
easily solvable
f1
f2
(1,1)
A
B
C(c1,c2)
(f1) +(f2) +…+(fM) =1p1 p2 pM
The Idea
!13
f1
f2
(1,1)
A
B
C(c1,c2)
(c1) +(c2) +…+(cM) =1p p p
(f1) +(f2) +…+(fM) =1p1 p2 pM
M * (c1) =1p
p = -
log(M)
log(c1)
Estimating the Geometry
!14
f1
f2
(1,1)
A
B
C
1. Find the point C(c1, c2,…, cM)
in F1 with minimum angle
distance to the bisector
2. Compute p using the formula:
0.5 1 1.5
B=(1,0)
C=(0.5, 0.5)
F=(0.9, 0.25)
f1
f central point C of a normalized non-
treme points in the front correspond to the
nt with the objective axes. After normaliza-
oint of F1 with the axis f n
i has the objective
bjectives f n
j = 0 for j , i. Furthermore, its
of the axes (ideal point) is always equal to
ent is chosen. This is because an extreme
(f n
1 (E) = 0, . . . , f n
i (E) = 1, . . . , f n
M (E) = 0)
o:
E)p
+ · · · + f n
i (E)p
+ · · · + f M
1 (E)p
⌘1/p
+ · · · + 1p
+ · · · + 0p 1/p
= 1
observation, our tting problem consists in
ystem of non-linear equations:
1)p + · · · + fM (S1)p )1/p
= 1
k )p + · · · + fM (Sk )p )1/p
= 1
(5)
whose exact solution is p = 1.
In general, given a generic central pointC that lies on the bis
of the rst quadrant ( Æ), the solution to the equation ||C||p is:
M’
i=1
C
p
i
!1/p
= 1 ! M · C
p
1 = 1
! C
p
1 = 1/Mx
! p =
lo (M)
lo (C1)
where Ci denotes the i-th coordinate of the central point C.
In the equation above, we assumed that the Ci lies exact
the bisector of the rst quadrant. However, in practice, the ce
point of a generic non-dominated front F1 may have a dist
dist?(C, Æ)  0 and, thus, its coordinates in the objective spac
not identical. For this reason, in AGE-MOEA (line 7 of Algorith
we approximate the value of the exponent p using the equati
p =
lo (M)
lo
⇣
1
M
ÕM
i=1 Ci
⌘ =
lo (M)
lo (M) lo
⇣ÕM
i=1 Ci
⌘
where M is the number of objectives; C is the central point
and computed with Equation 6; and Ci is the i-th coordina
C in the objective space. Since the coordinates of C cannot b
zero (otherwise C would coincide with the ideal point) nor all e
to ones (otherwise it would coincide with the nadir point)
summation
ÕM
i=1 Ci is always greater than zero and lower tha
This implies that the denominator in Equation 8 is always 
Overall complexity O(M x N)
The Survival Score
!15
An Adaptive Evolutionary Algorithm based on Non-Euclidean Geometry GECCO ’19, July 13–17, 2019, Prague, Czech Republic
Algorithm 2: SURVIVAL-SCORE
Input:
Fd : pool of non-dominated solutions
d: index of the non-dominated front
p: exponent of estimated geometry the p-norm
1 begin
2 if d==1 then
3 score[E] +1 /* E = extreme points of F1 */
4 E /* Considered solutions */
5 Fd  /* Remaining solutions */
6 for each solution S 2 do
7 proximity[S] ||f (S)||p
8 for each solution S1 2 Fd do
9 for each solution S2 2 Fd do
10 dist[S1, S2] ||f (S1) f (S2))||p
11 while | |  0 do
12 for each S 2 do
13 diversity[S] min
T 2
dist[S, T ] + min2
T 2
dist[S, T ]
14 value[S]
diversity[S]
proximity[S]
/* Select the solution with the max value */
15 S⇤ arg max
S2
value[S]
16 score[S⇤] value[S⇤]
17
–
{S⇤ } /* Considered solutions */
18  {S⇤ } /* Remaining solutions */
19 else
20 for each S 2 F1 do
21 score[S] 1/||f (S)||p
point C in Figure 1). A solution S with proximit (S)  1 dominates
parts of the unitary hypersurface of Lp (e.g., point D in Figure 1).
Equation 9, while the pairwise Lp distances between all solutions in
F1 are computed in lines 8-10. Then, the survival score is computed
within the loop in lines 12-14. In each loop, the procedure computes
the diversity score for the solutions in considering the minimum
(min) and the second minimum (min2) distances with regards to the
solution in (line 13 of Algorithm 2). In this way, the diversity of a
solution S is computed with regards to solutions that have already
been scored (or selected) in the previous iterations of the loop rather
than considering all solutions in F1. A temporary survival score
(value[S] in line 14) is then computed for each solution S 2 . The
solution S⇤ with the maximum temporary score in is selected
(line 15), and its nal survival score is assigned in line 16. Then,
the two sets and are updated in lines 17-18. The temporary
survival scores for the remaining solutions in are recomputed
in the next iterations since we need to recompute their relative
diversity with regards to the updated set .
Finally, the survival scores for the solutions in the non-dominated
fronts Fd1 are computed as the inverse of their proximity scores
(lines 19-21 in Algorithm 2). Hence, dominated solutions closer to
the unitary hypersurface induced by Lp have larger scores.
Complexity. The computational complexity of Algorithm 2 is
O(M ⇥ N2) + O(N3), where M is the number of objectives and N
is the population size. The elements of the overall complexity are:
• O(M ⇥ N) for computing the proximity scores in lines 6-7.
• O(M ⇥ N2) for computing the distances for each pair of
solutions in F1 (lines 8-10);
• O(N3) for the loop in lines 11-18. More specically, the inner
loop in line 12-14 has a complexity O(| | ⇥ | |) and it is
repeated | | (outer loop in line 11), where ✓ F1 and
✓ F1.
• O(M ⇥N) is the complexity for computing the survival score
for the fronts Fd1.
4 EMPIRICAL STUDY
Extreme points have maximum (+inf)
survival score
Proximity of each non-dominated point is
computed using the norm || · ||p
Compute the pairwise distance between
non-dominated points using the norm || · ||p
Iteratively select the solution with the
better score w.r.t. to already the selected
solutions
Score[S] =
proximity[S]
diversity[S] Normalized
diversity
Empirical Evaluation
16
Maf Benchmark
!17
Maf1 Linear, Inverted
Maf2 Concave
Maf3 Convex, Multimodal
Maf4 Concave, Multimodal
Maf5 Convex, Biased
Maf6 Concave, Degenerate
Maf7 Mixed, disconnected, Multimodal
Maf8 Linear, Degenerate
Maf9 Linear, Degenerate
Maf10 Mixed, Biased
Maf11 Convex, Disconnected, Non-separable
Maf12 Concave, Nonseparable, Biased
DeceptiveMaf13 Concave, Unimodal, Non-separable,
DegenerateMaf14 Linear, Partially separable, Large Scale
Maf15 Convex, Partially separable, Large
Scale
R. Cheng et al. A benchmark test suite for
evolutionary many-objective optimization. Complex
and Intelligent Systems 2017
True PFs for M=3
Baselines
• AR-MOEA [Y. Tian et al. 2018]
• GrEA [S. Yang et al. 2013]
• NSGA-III [Deb and Jain 2014]
• MOEA/D [Zang and Li 2007]
• θ-DEA [Yuan et al. 2016]
!18
Indicator-based with
reference point adaptation
Grid-based
θ-dominance
(relaxed dominance)
Reference points-based +
Dominance
Decomposition-based
Parameter Setting
!19
Parameters M=3 M=5 M=10
Population size N 91* 210* 275*
N. of fitness evaluations N*300 27300 63000 82500
SBX probability pc = 1
SBX distributed index ηc = 30
Polynomial mutation prob. Pm = 1/n
Mutation distr. index ηc = 20
M = # Objectives
# Ref. Points
needed by
NSGA-III and
MOEA/D
n = # decision
variables
* Das and Dennis systematic approach
Results for M=3
!20
An Adaptive Evolutionary Algorithm based on Non-Euclidean Geometry GECCO ’19, July 13–17, 2019, Prague, Czech Republic
Table 3: IGD values (mean and standard deviation) achieved by the AGE-MOEA and the baselines on the Maf benchmark [2] with
M=3,5, and 10 objectives. Best performance is highlighted in grey color.
Problem M AR-MOEA GrEA NSGA-III MOEA/D -DEA AGE-MOEA
MaF1 3 4.3854e-2 (5.49e-4) # 4.2393e-2 (8.39e-4)  6.1953e-2 (2.14e-3) # 7.0473e-2 (7.88e-6) # 8.0706e-2 (7.20e-4) # 4.3056e-2 (4.25e-4)
MaF2 3 3.2100e-2 (7.71e-4) # 3.1930e-2 (4.52e-4) # 3.6179e-2 (8.14e-4) # 4.1280e-2 (1.37e-3) # 3.6522e-2 (3.46e-4) # 3.1031e-2 (6.56e-4)
MaF3 3 1.5462e+0 (1.97e+0) # 9.9568e-1 (1.98e+0) # 2.3782e+0 (3.59e+0) # 3.1098e-1 (6.76e-1)  3.3974e+0 (5.63e+0) # 5.1510e-1 (1.41e+0)
MaF4 3 1.2607e+0 (2.01e+0) # 1.3245e+0 (1.58e+0) # 3.1889e+0 (2.92e+0) # 2.1207e+0 (9.71e-1) # 1.4392e+0 (1.83e+0) # 7.5761e-1 (1.20e+0)
MaF5 3 1.0265e+0 (1.27e+0) # 9.3317e-1 (1.02e+0) # 7.1456e-1 (1.00e+0) # 1.2690e+0 (1.43e+0) # 8.1065e-1 (7.54e-1) # 3.0978e-1 (3.24e-1)
MaF6 3 5.1379e-3 (1.18e-4)  2.0989e-2 (5.84e-4) # 1.4955e-2 (1.60e-3) # 7.9072e-2 (1.26e-1) # 3.3136e-2 (2.58e-3) # 5.4330e-3 (1.12e-4)
MaF7 3 1.9735e-1 (2.33e-1) # 8.6453e-2 (4.81e-3)  7.8716e-2 (3.87e-3)  1.7749e-1 (1.18e-1) # 1.0860e-1 (6.88e-2) # 9.1365e-2 (8.64e-2)
MaF8 3 9.5006e-2 (2.01e-2) # 8.6955e-2 (1.29e-2) # 1.3148e-1 (3.37e-2) # 2.9967e-1 (2.41e-1) # 1.9169e-1 (4.90e-2) # 7.8517e-2 (1.46e-2)
MaF9 3 8.1383e-2 (2.71e-2) # 4.6689e-1 (2.05e-1) # 8.9195e-2 (2.26e-2) # 1.3979e-1 (5.23e-2) # 8.4144e-2 (2.14e-2) # 6.8064e-2 (7.43e-3)
MaF10 3 3.3521e-1 (5.23e-2) # 2.4991e-1 (4.80e-2) ⇡ 4.3074e-1 (7.67e-2) # 5.7938e-1 (9.34e-2) # 3.9627e-1 (6.32e-2) # 2.2889e-1 (3.52e-2)
MaF11 3 1.6268e-1 (1.30e-3)  2.3696e-1 (1.24e-2) # 1.6323e-1 (2.67e-3)  2.6705e-1 (6.22e-2) # 1.5653e-1 (1.51e-3)  1.7044e-1 (3.47e-3)
MaF12 3 2.2402e-1 (3.35e-3) ⇡ 2.5115e-1 (6.79e-3) # 2.3015e-1 (2.12e-2) # 2.9391e-1 (2.51e-2) # 2.2429e-1 (2.05e-3) ⇡ 2.2441e-1 (2.47e-3)
MaF13 3 9.0600e-2 (7.82e-3) # 1.7135e-1 (2.59e-2) # 9.4125e-2 (9.68e-3) # 1.1631e-1 (3.33e-2) # 9.2006e-2 (8.73e-3) # 7.9967e-2 (4.42e-3)
MaF14 3 9.8537e-1 (3.06e-1) ⇡ 1.3652e+0 (4.70e-1) # 1.2546e+0 (4.14e-1) # 6.1995e-1 (1.38e-1)  1.2979e+0 (4.95e-1) # 9.3860e-1 (3.08e-1)
MaF15 3 3.8100e-1 (7.39e-2) ⇡ 5.8612e-1 (8.08e-2) # 7.2037e-1 (2.10e-1) # 3.7313e-1 (9.47e-2)  9.0553e-1 (8.52e-2) # 4.2139e-1 (9.32e-2)
MaF1 5 1.1596e-1 (1.05e-3) # 1.2184e-1 (2.19e-3) # 1.8400e-1 (9.92e-3) # 1.5437e-1 (5.43e-2) # 2.0875e-1 (5.47e-3) # 1.1017e-1 (1.61e-3)
MaF2 5 9.4906e-2 (1.16e-3) # 1.0120e-1 (1.42e-3) # 1.1296e-1 (3.08e-3) # 1.1078e-1 (2.96e-4) # 1.2384e-1 (2.71e-3) # 9.2976e-2 (1.10e-3)
MaF3 5 1.5533e-1 (3.23e-1) # 1.9521e+0 (4.31e+0) # 1.3713e+0 (2.89e+0) # 1.0495e-1 (6.18e-3) # 9.3684e-2 (4.50e-3) # 5.4560e-2 (8.97e-4)
MaF4 5 2.2834e+0 (9.02e-2) # 2.3563e+0 (1.59e+0) ⇡ 3.0028e+0 (1.85e+0) # 1.1559e+1 (1.15e+0) # 2.8182e+0 (2.11e-1) # 1.8275e+0 (6.47e-2)
MaF5 5 1.9730e+0 (4.94e-3) # 1.9916e+0 (8.98e-1) # 2.0382e+0 (3.00e-1) # 7.5844e+0 (1.89e+0) # 1.9662e+0 (6.12e-3) # 1.7508e+0 (2.64e-2)
MaF6 5 2.0461e-3 (4.15e-5)  3.5892e-2 (8.23e-4) # 1.6904e-2 (2.95e-3) # 1.1807e-1 (1.69e-1) # 8.1549e-2 (1.09e-2) # 2.4664e-3 (5.74e-5)
MaF7 5 2.5829e-1 (5.15e-3) ⇡ 2.3492e-1 (5.23e-3)  2.8437e-1 (5.73e-3) # 5.1550e-1 (2.40e-2) # 3.0107e-1 (2.50e-2) # 2.5782e-1 (1.72e-2)
MaF8
Mean and St. Dev. of the IGD across 50 runs
↑ means better than, ↓ worst than, and ≈ equivalent to AGE-MOEA
Maf3
!21
M = 3 objectives, N = 190 solutions, 300 iterations
IGD = 2.32e-2 IGD = 3.89e-2 IGD = 4.59e-2
IGD = 4.20e-2 IGD = 4.50e-2 IGD = 3.80e-2
Results for M=5
!22
An Adaptive Evolutionary Algorithm based on Non-Euclidean Geometry GECCO ’19, July 13–17, 2019, Prague, Czech Republic
Table 3: IGD values (mean and standard deviation) achieved by the AGE-MOEA and the baselines on the Maf benchmark [2] with
M=3,5, and 10 objectives. Best performance is highlighted in grey color.
Problem M AR-MOEA GrEA NSGA-III MOEA/D -DEA AGE-MOEA
MaF1 3 4.3854e-2 (5.49e-4) # 4.2393e-2 (8.39e-4)  6.1953e-2 (2.14e-3) # 7.0473e-2 (7.88e-6) # 8.0706e-2 (7.20e-4) # 4.3056e-2 (4.25e-4)
MaF2 3 3.2100e-2 (7.71e-4) # 3.1930e-2 (4.52e-4) # 3.6179e-2 (8.14e-4) # 4.1280e-2 (1.37e-3) # 3.6522e-2 (3.46e-4) # 3.1031e-2 (6.56e-4)
MaF3 3 1.5462e+0 (1.97e+0) # 9.9568e-1 (1.98e+0) # 2.3782e+0 (3.59e+0) # 3.1098e-1 (6.76e-1)  3.3974e+0 (5.63e+0) # 5.1510e-1 (1.41e+0)
MaF4 3 1.2607e+0 (2.01e+0) # 1.3245e+0 (1.58e+0) # 3.1889e+0 (2.92e+0) # 2.1207e+0 (9.71e-1) # 1.4392e+0 (1.83e+0) # 7.5761e-1 (1.20e+0)
MaF5 3 1.0265e+0 (1.27e+0) # 9.3317e-1 (1.02e+0) # 7.1456e-1 (1.00e+0) # 1.2690e+0 (1.43e+0) # 8.1065e-1 (7.54e-1) # 3.0978e-1 (3.24e-1)
MaF6 3 5.1379e-3 (1.18e-4)  2.0989e-2 (5.84e-4) # 1.4955e-2 (1.60e-3) # 7.9072e-2 (1.26e-1) # 3.3136e-2 (2.58e-3) # 5.4330e-3 (1.12e-4)
MaF7 3 1.9735e-1 (2.33e-1) # 8.6453e-2 (4.81e-3)  7.8716e-2 (3.87e-3)  1.7749e-1 (1.18e-1) # 1.0860e-1 (6.88e-2) # 9.1365e-2 (8.64e-2)
MaF8 3 9.5006e-2 (2.01e-2) # 8.6955e-2 (1.29e-2) # 1.3148e-1 (3.37e-2) # 2.9967e-1 (2.41e-1) # 1.9169e-1 (4.90e-2) # 7.8517e-2 (1.46e-2)
MaF9 3 8.1383e-2 (2.71e-2) # 4.6689e-1 (2.05e-1) # 8.9195e-2 (2.26e-2) # 1.3979e-1 (5.23e-2) # 8.4144e-2 (2.14e-2) # 6.8064e-2 (7.43e-3)
MaF10 3 3.3521e-1 (5.23e-2) # 2.4991e-1 (4.80e-2) ⇡ 4.3074e-1 (7.67e-2) # 5.7938e-1 (9.34e-2) # 3.9627e-1 (6.32e-2) # 2.2889e-1 (3.52e-2)
MaF11 3 1.6268e-1 (1.30e-3)  2.3696e-1 (1.24e-2) # 1.6323e-1 (2.67e-3)  2.6705e-1 (6.22e-2) # 1.5653e-1 (1.51e-3)  1.7044e-1 (3.47e-3)
MaF12 3 2.2402e-1 (3.35e-3) ⇡ 2.5115e-1 (6.79e-3) # 2.3015e-1 (2.12e-2) # 2.9391e-1 (2.51e-2) # 2.2429e-1 (2.05e-3) ⇡ 2.2441e-1 (2.47e-3)
MaF13 3 9.0600e-2 (7.82e-3) # 1.7135e-1 (2.59e-2) # 9.4125e-2 (9.68e-3) # 1.1631e-1 (3.33e-2) # 9.2006e-2 (8.73e-3) # 7.9967e-2 (4.42e-3)
MaF14 3 9.8537e-1 (3.06e-1) ⇡ 1.3652e+0 (4.70e-1) # 1.2546e+0 (4.14e-1) # 6.1995e-1 (1.38e-1)  1.2979e+0 (4.95e-1) # 9.3860e-1 (3.08e-1)
MaF15 3 3.8100e-1 (7.39e-2) ⇡ 5.8612e-1 (8.08e-2) # 7.2037e-1 (2.10e-1) # 3.7313e-1 (9.47e-2)  9.0553e-1 (8.52e-2) # 4.2139e-1 (9.32e-2)
MaF1 5 1.1596e-1 (1.05e-3) # 1.2184e-1 (2.19e-3) # 1.8400e-1 (9.92e-3) # 1.5437e-1 (5.43e-2) # 2.0875e-1 (5.47e-3) # 1.1017e-1 (1.61e-3)
MaF2 5 9.4906e-2 (1.16e-3) # 1.0120e-1 (1.42e-3) # 1.1296e-1 (3.08e-3) # 1.1078e-1 (2.96e-4) # 1.2384e-1 (2.71e-3) # 9.2976e-2 (1.10e-3)
MaF3 5 1.5533e-1 (3.23e-1) # 1.9521e+0 (4.31e+0) # 1.3713e+0 (2.89e+0) # 1.0495e-1 (6.18e-3) # 9.3684e-2 (4.50e-3) # 5.4560e-2 (8.97e-4)
MaF4 5 2.2834e+0 (9.02e-2) # 2.3563e+0 (1.59e+0) ⇡ 3.0028e+0 (1.85e+0) # 1.1559e+1 (1.15e+0) # 2.8182e+0 (2.11e-1) # 1.8275e+0 (6.47e-2)
MaF5 5 1.9730e+0 (4.94e-3) # 1.9916e+0 (8.98e-1) # 2.0382e+0 (3.00e-1) # 7.5844e+0 (1.89e+0) # 1.9662e+0 (6.12e-3) # 1.7508e+0 (2.64e-2)
MaF6 5 2.0461e-3 (4.15e-5)  3.5892e-2 (8.23e-4) # 1.6904e-2 (2.95e-3) # 1.1807e-1 (1.69e-1) # 8.1549e-2 (1.09e-2) # 2.4664e-3 (5.74e-5)
MaF7 5 2.5829e-1 (5.15e-3) ⇡ 2.3492e-1 (5.23e-3)  2.8437e-1 (5.73e-3) # 5.1550e-1 (2.40e-2) # 3.0107e-1 (2.50e-2) # 2.5782e-1 (1.72e-2)
MaF8
Mean and St. Dev. of the IGD across 50 runs
↑ means better than, ↓ worst than, and ≈ equivalent to AGE-MOEA
Problem M AR-MOEA GrEA NSGA-III MOEA/D -DEA AGE-MOEA
MaF1 3 4.3854e-2 (5.49e-4) # 4.2393e-2 (8.39e-4)  6.1953e-2 (2.14e-3) # 7.0473e-2 (7.88e-6) # 8.0706e-2 (7.20e-4) # 4.3056e-2 (4.25e-4)
MaF2 3 3.2100e-2 (7.71e-4) # 3.1930e-2 (4.52e-4) # 3.6179e-2 (8.14e-4) # 4.1280e-2 (1.37e-3) # 3.6522e-2 (3.46e-4) # 3.1031e-2 (6.56e-4)
MaF3 3 1.5462e+0 (1.97e+0) # 9.9568e-1 (1.98e+0) # 2.3782e+0 (3.59e+0) # 3.1098e-1 (6.76e-1)  3.3974e+0 (5.63e+0) # 5.1510e-1 (1.41e+0)
MaF4 3 1.2607e+0 (2.01e+0) # 1.3245e+0 (1.58e+0) # 3.1889e+0 (2.92e+0) # 2.1207e+0 (9.71e-1) # 1.4392e+0 (1.83e+0) # 7.5761e-1 (1.20e+0)
MaF5 3 1.0265e+0 (1.27e+0) # 9.3317e-1 (1.02e+0) # 7.1456e-1 (1.00e+0) # 1.2690e+0 (1.43e+0) # 8.1065e-1 (7.54e-1) # 3.0978e-1 (3.24e-1)
MaF6 3 5.1379e-3 (1.18e-4)  2.0989e-2 (5.84e-4) # 1.4955e-2 (1.60e-3) # 7.9072e-2 (1.26e-1) # 3.3136e-2 (2.58e-3) # 5.4330e-3 (1.12e-4)
MaF7 3 1.9735e-1 (2.33e-1) # 8.6453e-2 (4.81e-3)  7.8716e-2 (3.87e-3)  1.7749e-1 (1.18e-1) # 1.0860e-1 (6.88e-2) # 9.1365e-2 (8.64e-2)
MaF8 3 9.5006e-2 (2.01e-2) # 8.6955e-2 (1.29e-2) # 1.3148e-1 (3.37e-2) # 2.9967e-1 (2.41e-1) # 1.9169e-1 (4.90e-2) # 7.8517e-2 (1.46e-2)
MaF9 3 8.1383e-2 (2.71e-2) # 4.6689e-1 (2.05e-1) # 8.9195e-2 (2.26e-2) # 1.3979e-1 (5.23e-2) # 8.4144e-2 (2.14e-2) # 6.8064e-2 (7.43e-3)
MaF10 3 3.3521e-1 (5.23e-2) # 2.4991e-1 (4.80e-2) ⇡ 4.3074e-1 (7.67e-2) # 5.7938e-1 (9.34e-2) # 3.9627e-1 (6.32e-2) # 2.2889e-1 (3.52e-2)
MaF11 3 1.6268e-1 (1.30e-3)  2.3696e-1 (1.24e-2) # 1.6323e-1 (2.67e-3)  2.6705e-1 (6.22e-2) # 1.5653e-1 (1.51e-3)  1.7044e-1 (3.47e-3)
MaF12 3 2.2402e-1 (3.35e-3) ⇡ 2.5115e-1 (6.79e-3) # 2.3015e-1 (2.12e-2) # 2.9391e-1 (2.51e-2) # 2.2429e-1 (2.05e-3) ⇡ 2.2441e-1 (2.47e-3)
MaF13 3 9.0600e-2 (7.82e-3) # 1.7135e-1 (2.59e-2) # 9.4125e-2 (9.68e-3) # 1.1631e-1 (3.33e-2) # 9.2006e-2 (8.73e-3) # 7.9967e-2 (4.42e-3)
MaF14 3 9.8537e-1 (3.06e-1) ⇡ 1.3652e+0 (4.70e-1) # 1.2546e+0 (4.14e-1) # 6.1995e-1 (1.38e-1)  1.2979e+0 (4.95e-1) # 9.3860e-1 (3.08e-1)
MaF15 3 3.8100e-1 (7.39e-2) ⇡ 5.8612e-1 (8.08e-2) # 7.2037e-1 (2.10e-1) # 3.7313e-1 (9.47e-2)  9.0553e-1 (8.52e-2) # 4.2139e-1 (9.32e-2)
MaF1 5 1.1596e-1 (1.05e-3) # 1.2184e-1 (2.19e-3) # 1.8400e-1 (9.92e-3) # 1.5437e-1 (5.43e-2) # 2.0875e-1 (5.47e-3) # 1.1017e-1 (1.61e-3)
MaF2 5 9.4906e-2 (1.16e-3) # 1.0120e-1 (1.42e-3) # 1.1296e-1 (3.08e-3) # 1.1078e-1 (2.96e-4) # 1.2384e-1 (2.71e-3) # 9.2976e-2 (1.10e-3)
MaF3 5 1.5533e-1 (3.23e-1) # 1.9521e+0 (4.31e+0) # 1.3713e+0 (2.89e+0) # 1.0495e-1 (6.18e-3) # 9.3684e-2 (4.50e-3) # 5.4560e-2 (8.97e-4)
MaF4 5 2.2834e+0 (9.02e-2) # 2.3563e+0 (1.59e+0) ⇡ 3.0028e+0 (1.85e+0) # 1.1559e+1 (1.15e+0) # 2.8182e+0 (2.11e-1) # 1.8275e+0 (6.47e-2)
MaF5 5 1.9730e+0 (4.94e-3) # 1.9916e+0 (8.98e-1) # 2.0382e+0 (3.00e-1) # 7.5844e+0 (1.89e+0) # 1.9662e+0 (6.12e-3) # 1.7508e+0 (2.64e-2)
MaF6 5 2.0461e-3 (4.15e-5)  3.5892e-2 (8.23e-4) # 1.6904e-2 (2.95e-3) # 1.1807e-1 (1.69e-1) # 8.1549e-2 (1.09e-2) # 2.4664e-3 (5.74e-5)
MaF7 5 2.5829e-1 (5.15e-3) ⇡ 2.3492e-1 (5.23e-3)  2.8437e-1 (5.73e-3) # 5.1550e-1 (2.40e-2) # 3.0107e-1 (2.50e-2) # 2.5782e-1 (1.72e-2)
MaF8 5 8.9355e-2 (2.23e-3) # 1.2940e-1 (5.50e-3) # 1.6331e-1 (7.80e-3) # 2.5847e-1 (6.81e-2) # 3.0528e-1 (3.94e-2) # 7.6191e-2 (6.97e-4)
MaF9 5 8.8245e-2 (5.05e-3) ⇡ 1.1496e+0 (3.88e-1) # 3.5017e-1 (1.62e-1) # 1.3132e-1 (3.75e-2) # 6.7137e-1 (1.79e-1) # 8.8524e-2 (6.79e-3)
MaF10 5 6.8772e-1 (5.42e-2) # 5.1743e-1 (2.38e-2) # 8.2837e-1 (6.74e-2) # 8.7736e-1 (5.15e-2) # 6.4136e-1 (6.88e-2) # 4.1464e-1 (2.49e-2)
MaF11 5 3.9050e-1 (3.34e-3) # 4.9965e-1 (2.09e-2) # 3.8658e-1 (2.98e-3) ⇡ 7.7530e-1 (4.46e-2) # 3.8803e-1 (3.72e-3) ⇡ 3.8570e-1 (4.75e-3)
MaF12 5 9.4651e-1 (4.83e-3) # 9.3832e-1 (6.53e-3) # 9.3385e-1 (5.03e-3) # 1.6205e+0 (1.04e-1) # 9.2941e-1 (3.69e-3) # 9.2122e-1 (5.03e-3)
MaF13 5 9.5739e-2 (5.09e-3) # 3.8905e-1 (1.03e-1) # 1.7174e-1 (1.61e-2) # 1.6123e-1 (4.18e-2) # 2.9768e-1 (4.66e-2) # 8.9651e-2 (7.13e-3)
MaF14 5 8.1409e-1 (2.57e-1) # 7.5450e-1 (1.48e-1) # 8.4358e-1 (1.95e-1) # 7.8806e-1 (2.35e-1) # 1.0024e+0 (4.03e-1) # 6.5343e-1 (1.41e-1)
MaF15 5 5.6385e-1 (7.85e-2)  7.3806e-1 (5.00e-2)  1.2955e+0 (2.06e-1) # 6.3603e-1 (1.13e-1)  1.0880e+0 (1.09e-1) ⇡ 1.0901e+0 (2.33e-1)
MaF1 10 2.2537e-1 (1.69e-3)  2.3703e-1 (6.26e-3) ⇡ 2.8389e-1 (5.74e-3) # 5.3403e-1 (2.47e-2) # 3.1707e-1 (7.43e-3) # 2.3803e-1 (5.36e-3)
MaF2 10 1.8400e-1 (6.49e-3) # 3.6911e-1 (1.65e-2) # 2.0898e-1 (1.71e-2) # 2.6117e-1 (1.43e-3) # 1.9988e-1 (8.11e-3) # 1.7370e-1 (5.34e-3)
MaF3 10 1.5649e+0 (5.04e+0) # 1.4697e+4 (1.69e+4) # 3.2428e+3 (6.34e+3) # 1.4320e-1 (2.11e-3) # 8.5241e+0 (2.40e+1) # 6.9331e-2 (1.01e-3)
MaF4 10 9.5813e+1 (6.24e+0) # 1.6292e+2 (3.91e+1) # 9.4722e+1 (8.70e+0) # 5.3804e+2 (4.52e+1) # 1.1635e+2 (1.39e+1) # 5.7991e+1 (4.15e+0)
MaF5 10 9.7353e+1 (5.14e+0) # 4.7038e+1 (1.05e+0) ⇡ 7.7391e+1 (1.23e+0) # 3.0165e+2 (2.68e+0) # 7.7560e+1 (7.13e-1) # 4.6762e+1 (1.57e+0)
MaF6 10 3.4000e-1 (3.17e-1) ⇡ 8.6533e-1 (4.10e-1) # 6.1137e-1 (2.11e-1) # 1.1737e-1 (1.62e-1)  1.6267e-1 (2.56e-1)  3.5746e-1 (1.78e-1)
MaF7 10 1.4115e+0 (8.58e-2) # 2.6086e+0 (6.41e-2) # 1.1407e+0 (7.72e-2) # 2.4215e+0 (5.00e-1) # 9.0120e-1 (4.96e-2) # 8.4737e-1 (9.93e-3)
Results for M=10
!23
An Adaptive Evolutionary Algorithm based on Non-Euclidean Geometry GECCO ’19, July 13–17, 2019, Prague, Czech Republic
Table 3: IGD values (mean and standard deviation) achieved by the AGE-MOEA and the baselines on the Maf benchmark [2] with
M=3,5, and 10 objectives. Best performance is highlighted in grey color.
Problem M AR-MOEA GrEA NSGA-III MOEA/D -DEA AGE-MOEA
MaF1 3 4.3854e-2 (5.49e-4) # 4.2393e-2 (8.39e-4)  6.1953e-2 (2.14e-3) # 7.0473e-2 (7.88e-6) # 8.0706e-2 (7.20e-4) # 4.3056e-2 (4.25e-4)
MaF2 3 3.2100e-2 (7.71e-4) # 3.1930e-2 (4.52e-4) # 3.6179e-2 (8.14e-4) # 4.1280e-2 (1.37e-3) # 3.6522e-2 (3.46e-4) # 3.1031e-2 (6.56e-4)
MaF3 3 1.5462e+0 (1.97e+0) # 9.9568e-1 (1.98e+0) # 2.3782e+0 (3.59e+0) # 3.1098e-1 (6.76e-1)  3.3974e+0 (5.63e+0) # 5.1510e-1 (1.41e+0)
MaF4 3 1.2607e+0 (2.01e+0) # 1.3245e+0 (1.58e+0) # 3.1889e+0 (2.92e+0) # 2.1207e+0 (9.71e-1) # 1.4392e+0 (1.83e+0) # 7.5761e-1 (1.20e+0)
MaF5 3 1.0265e+0 (1.27e+0) # 9.3317e-1 (1.02e+0) # 7.1456e-1 (1.00e+0) # 1.2690e+0 (1.43e+0) # 8.1065e-1 (7.54e-1) # 3.0978e-1 (3.24e-1)
MaF6 3 5.1379e-3 (1.18e-4)  2.0989e-2 (5.84e-4) # 1.4955e-2 (1.60e-3) # 7.9072e-2 (1.26e-1) # 3.3136e-2 (2.58e-3) # 5.4330e-3 (1.12e-4)
MaF7 3 1.9735e-1 (2.33e-1) # 8.6453e-2 (4.81e-3)  7.8716e-2 (3.87e-3)  1.7749e-1 (1.18e-1) # 1.0860e-1 (6.88e-2) # 9.1365e-2 (8.64e-2)
MaF8 3 9.5006e-2 (2.01e-2) # 8.6955e-2 (1.29e-2) # 1.3148e-1 (3.37e-2) # 2.9967e-1 (2.41e-1) # 1.9169e-1 (4.90e-2) # 7.8517e-2 (1.46e-2)
MaF9 3 8.1383e-2 (2.71e-2) # 4.6689e-1 (2.05e-1) # 8.9195e-2 (2.26e-2) # 1.3979e-1 (5.23e-2) # 8.4144e-2 (2.14e-2) # 6.8064e-2 (7.43e-3)
MaF10 3 3.3521e-1 (5.23e-2) # 2.4991e-1 (4.80e-2) ⇡ 4.3074e-1 (7.67e-2) # 5.7938e-1 (9.34e-2) # 3.9627e-1 (6.32e-2) # 2.2889e-1 (3.52e-2)
MaF11 3 1.6268e-1 (1.30e-3)  2.3696e-1 (1.24e-2) # 1.6323e-1 (2.67e-3)  2.6705e-1 (6.22e-2) # 1.5653e-1 (1.51e-3)  1.7044e-1 (3.47e-3)
MaF12 3 2.2402e-1 (3.35e-3) ⇡ 2.5115e-1 (6.79e-3) # 2.3015e-1 (2.12e-2) # 2.9391e-1 (2.51e-2) # 2.2429e-1 (2.05e-3) ⇡ 2.2441e-1 (2.47e-3)
MaF13 3 9.0600e-2 (7.82e-3) # 1.7135e-1 (2.59e-2) # 9.4125e-2 (9.68e-3) # 1.1631e-1 (3.33e-2) # 9.2006e-2 (8.73e-3) # 7.9967e-2 (4.42e-3)
MaF14 3 9.8537e-1 (3.06e-1) ⇡ 1.3652e+0 (4.70e-1) # 1.2546e+0 (4.14e-1) # 6.1995e-1 (1.38e-1)  1.2979e+0 (4.95e-1) # 9.3860e-1 (3.08e-1)
MaF15 3 3.8100e-1 (7.39e-2) ⇡ 5.8612e-1 (8.08e-2) # 7.2037e-1 (2.10e-1) # 3.7313e-1 (9.47e-2)  9.0553e-1 (8.52e-2) # 4.2139e-1 (9.32e-2)
MaF1 5 1.1596e-1 (1.05e-3) # 1.2184e-1 (2.19e-3) # 1.8400e-1 (9.92e-3) # 1.5437e-1 (5.43e-2) # 2.0875e-1 (5.47e-3) # 1.1017e-1 (1.61e-3)
MaF2 5 9.4906e-2 (1.16e-3) # 1.0120e-1 (1.42e-3) # 1.1296e-1 (3.08e-3) # 1.1078e-1 (2.96e-4) # 1.2384e-1 (2.71e-3) # 9.2976e-2 (1.10e-3)
MaF3 5 1.5533e-1 (3.23e-1) # 1.9521e+0 (4.31e+0) # 1.3713e+0 (2.89e+0) # 1.0495e-1 (6.18e-3) # 9.3684e-2 (4.50e-3) # 5.4560e-2 (8.97e-4)
MaF4 5 2.2834e+0 (9.02e-2) # 2.3563e+0 (1.59e+0) ⇡ 3.0028e+0 (1.85e+0) # 1.1559e+1 (1.15e+0) # 2.8182e+0 (2.11e-1) # 1.8275e+0 (6.47e-2)
MaF5 5 1.9730e+0 (4.94e-3) # 1.9916e+0 (8.98e-1) # 2.0382e+0 (3.00e-1) # 7.5844e+0 (1.89e+0) # 1.9662e+0 (6.12e-3) # 1.7508e+0 (2.64e-2)
MaF6 5 2.0461e-3 (4.15e-5)  3.5892e-2 (8.23e-4) # 1.6904e-2 (2.95e-3) # 1.1807e-1 (1.69e-1) # 8.1549e-2 (1.09e-2) # 2.4664e-3 (5.74e-5)
MaF7 5 2.5829e-1 (5.15e-3) ⇡ 2.3492e-1 (5.23e-3)  2.8437e-1 (5.73e-3) # 5.1550e-1 (2.40e-2) # 3.0107e-1 (2.50e-2) # 2.5782e-1 (1.72e-2)
MaF8
Mean and St. Dev. of the IGD across 50 runs
↑ means better than, ↓ worst than, and ≈ equivalent to AGE-MOEA
MaF15 3 3.8100e-1 (7.39e-2) ⇡ 5.8612e-1 (8.08e-2) # 7.2037e-1 (2.10e-1) # 3.7313e-1 (9.47e-2)  9.0553e-1 (8.52e-2) # 4.2139e-1 (9.32e-2)
MaF1 5 1.1596e-1 (1.05e-3) # 1.2184e-1 (2.19e-3) # 1.8400e-1 (9.92e-3) # 1.5437e-1 (5.43e-2) # 2.0875e-1 (5.47e-3) # 1.1017e-1 (1.61e-3)
MaF2 5 9.4906e-2 (1.16e-3) # 1.0120e-1 (1.42e-3) # 1.1296e-1 (3.08e-3) # 1.1078e-1 (2.96e-4) # 1.2384e-1 (2.71e-3) # 9.2976e-2 (1.10e-3)
MaF3 5 1.5533e-1 (3.23e-1) # 1.9521e+0 (4.31e+0) # 1.3713e+0 (2.89e+0) # 1.0495e-1 (6.18e-3) # 9.3684e-2 (4.50e-3) # 5.4560e-2 (8.97e-4)
MaF4 5 2.2834e+0 (9.02e-2) # 2.3563e+0 (1.59e+0) ⇡ 3.0028e+0 (1.85e+0) # 1.1559e+1 (1.15e+0) # 2.8182e+0 (2.11e-1) # 1.8275e+0 (6.47e-2)
MaF5 5 1.9730e+0 (4.94e-3) # 1.9916e+0 (8.98e-1) # 2.0382e+0 (3.00e-1) # 7.5844e+0 (1.89e+0) # 1.9662e+0 (6.12e-3) # 1.7508e+0 (2.64e-2)
MaF6 5 2.0461e-3 (4.15e-5)  3.5892e-2 (8.23e-4) # 1.6904e-2 (2.95e-3) # 1.1807e-1 (1.69e-1) # 8.1549e-2 (1.09e-2) # 2.4664e-3 (5.74e-5)
MaF7 5 2.5829e-1 (5.15e-3) ⇡ 2.3492e-1 (5.23e-3)  2.8437e-1 (5.73e-3) # 5.1550e-1 (2.40e-2) # 3.0107e-1 (2.50e-2) # 2.5782e-1 (1.72e-2)
MaF8 5 8.9355e-2 (2.23e-3) # 1.2940e-1 (5.50e-3) # 1.6331e-1 (7.80e-3) # 2.5847e-1 (6.81e-2) # 3.0528e-1 (3.94e-2) # 7.6191e-2 (6.97e-4)
MaF9 5 8.8245e-2 (5.05e-3) ⇡ 1.1496e+0 (3.88e-1) # 3.5017e-1 (1.62e-1) # 1.3132e-1 (3.75e-2) # 6.7137e-1 (1.79e-1) # 8.8524e-2 (6.79e-3)
MaF10 5 6.8772e-1 (5.42e-2) # 5.1743e-1 (2.38e-2) # 8.2837e-1 (6.74e-2) # 8.7736e-1 (5.15e-2) # 6.4136e-1 (6.88e-2) # 4.1464e-1 (2.49e-2)
MaF11 5 3.9050e-1 (3.34e-3) # 4.9965e-1 (2.09e-2) # 3.8658e-1 (2.98e-3) ⇡ 7.7530e-1 (4.46e-2) # 3.8803e-1 (3.72e-3) ⇡ 3.8570e-1 (4.75e-3)
MaF12 5 9.4651e-1 (4.83e-3) # 9.3832e-1 (6.53e-3) # 9.3385e-1 (5.03e-3) # 1.6205e+0 (1.04e-1) # 9.2941e-1 (3.69e-3) # 9.2122e-1 (5.03e-3)
MaF13 5 9.5739e-2 (5.09e-3) # 3.8905e-1 (1.03e-1) # 1.7174e-1 (1.61e-2) # 1.6123e-1 (4.18e-2) # 2.9768e-1 (4.66e-2) # 8.9651e-2 (7.13e-3)
MaF14 5 8.1409e-1 (2.57e-1) # 7.5450e-1 (1.48e-1) # 8.4358e-1 (1.95e-1) # 7.8806e-1 (2.35e-1) # 1.0024e+0 (4.03e-1) # 6.5343e-1 (1.41e-1)
MaF15 5 5.6385e-1 (7.85e-2)  7.3806e-1 (5.00e-2)  1.2955e+0 (2.06e-1) # 6.3603e-1 (1.13e-1)  1.0880e+0 (1.09e-1) ⇡ 1.0901e+0 (2.33e-1)
MaF1 10 2.2537e-1 (1.69e-3)  2.3703e-1 (6.26e-3) ⇡ 2.8389e-1 (5.74e-3) # 5.3403e-1 (2.47e-2) # 3.1707e-1 (7.43e-3) # 2.3803e-1 (5.36e-3)
MaF2 10 1.8400e-1 (6.49e-3) # 3.6911e-1 (1.65e-2) # 2.0898e-1 (1.71e-2) # 2.6117e-1 (1.43e-3) # 1.9988e-1 (8.11e-3) # 1.7370e-1 (5.34e-3)
MaF3 10 1.5649e+0 (5.04e+0) # 1.4697e+4 (1.69e+4) # 3.2428e+3 (6.34e+3) # 1.4320e-1 (2.11e-3) # 8.5241e+0 (2.40e+1) # 6.9331e-2 (1.01e-3)
MaF4 10 9.5813e+1 (6.24e+0) # 1.6292e+2 (3.91e+1) # 9.4722e+1 (8.70e+0) # 5.3804e+2 (4.52e+1) # 1.1635e+2 (1.39e+1) # 5.7991e+1 (4.15e+0)
MaF5 10 9.7353e+1 (5.14e+0) # 4.7038e+1 (1.05e+0) ⇡ 7.7391e+1 (1.23e+0) # 3.0165e+2 (2.68e+0) # 7.7560e+1 (7.13e-1) # 4.6762e+1 (1.57e+0)
MaF6 10 3.4000e-1 (3.17e-1) ⇡ 8.6533e-1 (4.10e-1) # 6.1137e-1 (2.11e-1) # 1.1737e-1 (1.62e-1)  1.6267e-1 (2.56e-1)  3.5746e-1 (1.78e-1)
MaF7 10 1.4115e+0 (8.58e-2) # 2.6086e+0 (6.41e-2) # 1.1407e+0 (7.72e-2) # 2.4215e+0 (5.00e-1) # 9.0120e-1 (4.96e-2) # 8.4737e-1 (9.93e-3)
MaF8 10 1.2401e-1 (3.31e-3) # 1.4432e-1 (4.02e-3) # 2.7530e-1 (4.98e-2) # 9.6382e-1 (2.25e-2) # 7.5206e-1 (9.76e-2) # 1.0316e-1 (6.42e-4)
MaF9 10 1.5808e-1 (7.75e-3)  1.4224e+0 (5.86e-2) # 4.4905e-1 (1.09e-1) # 1.3035e+0 (1.61e+0) # 7.8762e-1 (1.46e-1) # 2.9156e-1 (9.70e-3)
MaF10 10 1.5107e+0 (1.01e-1) # 1.1179e+0 (4.06e-2) # 1.6448e+0 (1.35e-1) # 1.9093e+0 (1.39e-1) # 1.1739e+0 (8.54e-2) # 9.2879e-1 (1.74e-2)
MaF11 10 9.9968e-1 (3.65e-2) # 1.1312e+0 (3.55e-2) # 1.2069e+0 (1.97e-1) # 1.9329e+0 (4.15e-2) # 1.1605e+0 (1.44e-1) # 9.7470e-1 (1.28e-2)
MaF12 10 4.4564e+0 (2.82e-2) # 4.1458e+0 (4.01e-2) # 4.3421e+0 (7.55e-2) # 8.9572e+0 (1.64e-1) # 4.3330e+0 (3.25e-2) # 3.9226e+0 (2.99e-2)
MaF13 10 1.1361e-1 (5.45e-3) # 4.4202e-1 (2.39e-1) # 2.2892e-1 (3.43e-2) # 9.4977e-1 (6.99e-2) # 5.6955e-1 (9.15e-2) # 9.6785e-2 (9.11e-3)
MaF14 10 6.2926e-1 (4.32e-2) ⇡ 1.1096e+0 (2.47e-1) # 1.2089e+0 (3.12e-1) # 4.6465e-1 (1.04e-1)  1.0947e+0 (4.30e-1) # 6.1479e-1 (3.64e-2)
MaF15 10 8.9098e-1 (1.31e-1)  1.3888e+0 (4.96e-1) ⇡ 1.3848e+0 (2.28e-1) # 1.0341e+0 (9.57e-2) ⇡ 1.2753e+0 (1.41e-1) # 1.0738e+0 (1.46e-1)
f objectives. More specically, AGE-MOEA achieves signicantly
etter IGD values in 12 problems (out of 15) for M=3, in 14 problems
orm M=5, and in 12 problems for M=10. The largest dierence
etween the two MOEAs is observed for the Maf6 test problem
with M=5. The optimal Pareto front for Maf6 is concave (i.e., it has
Concerning -DEA, we observe that AGE-MOEA outperforms -DEA
in 13 out of 15 test problems for M=3 and M=15; and in 14 out of 15
test problems for M=10. Independently of the number of objectives
M, there are six test problems for which the IGD values achieved
by AGE-MOEA are at least one order of magnitude smaller than the
AGE-MOEA Vs. GFM-MOEA
!24
Hyperbolic Shifted
Degenerate Irregular
1
100
MaF10 MaF3 MaF4 MaF8
Problems
IGD
Algorithms
AGEMOEA
GFMMOEA
True PF for M=3
IGD values M=10, 50 runs
Pop size = 275, #Gen = 300
AGE-MOEA Vs. GFM-MOEA
!25
100
MaF10 MaF3 MaF4 MaF8
Problems
IGD
Algorithms
AGEMOEA
GFMMOEA
Running time (in s), 50 runs
10
1
100
MaF10 MaF3 MaF4 MaF8
Problems
IGD
Algorithms
AGEMOEA
GFMMOEA
IGD values M=10, 50 runs
Pop size = 275, #Gen = 300
AGE-MOEA
!26
10
https://github.com/apanichella/PlatEMO
In Summary
!27
10

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Solving polynomial inequalities by graphing
Solving polynomial inequalities by graphingSolving polynomial inequalities by graphing
Solving polynomial inequalities by graphingTarun Gehlot
 
Applied Calculus Chapter 1 polar coordinates and vector
Applied Calculus Chapter  1 polar coordinates and vectorApplied Calculus Chapter  1 polar coordinates and vector
Applied Calculus Chapter 1 polar coordinates and vectorJ C
 
12 practice paper_3_h_-_set_a_mark_scheme
12 practice paper_3_h_-_set_a_mark_scheme12 practice paper_3_h_-_set_a_mark_scheme
12 practice paper_3_h_-_set_a_mark_schemeclaire meadows-smith
 
Introduction to sequences and series
Introduction to sequences and seriesIntroduction to sequences and series
Introduction to sequences and seriesMaxTorresdey
 
IIT JEE - Mathematics 2009 i
IIT JEE  - Mathematics  2009  iIIT JEE  - Mathematics  2009  i
IIT JEE - Mathematics 2009 iVasista Vinuthan
 
Unit 2_higher mark_scheme_march_2011 unit 2
 Unit 2_higher mark_scheme_march_2011 unit 2 Unit 2_higher mark_scheme_march_2011 unit 2
Unit 2_higher mark_scheme_march_2011 unit 2claire meadows-smith
 
Chapters Summary (X class)
Chapters Summary (X class)Chapters Summary (X class)
Chapters Summary (X class)Rahul Rawat
 
(Mhs)2 calculator enrichment
(Mhs)2 calculator enrichment(Mhs)2 calculator enrichment
(Mhs)2 calculator enrichmentpwalkermathlead
 
Chapter 2 : EQUATIONS AND INEQUALITIES
Chapter 2 : EQUATIONS AND INEQUALITIESChapter 2 : EQUATIONS AND INEQUALITIES
Chapter 2 : EQUATIONS AND INEQUALITIESNurul Ainn
 
Chapter 1 sequences and series lesson
Chapter 1 sequences and series lessonChapter 1 sequences and series lesson
Chapter 1 sequences and series lessonLinden Ulysses Meyers
 
Nbhm m. a. and m.sc. scholarship test 2005
Nbhm m. a. and m.sc. scholarship test 2005Nbhm m. a. and m.sc. scholarship test 2005
Nbhm m. a. and m.sc. scholarship test 2005MD Kutubuddin Sardar
 
Aditya Class 8th
Aditya Class 8thAditya Class 8th
Aditya Class 8thBasantOjha1
 
Limit aljabar ukb coba2 kelas 11
Limit aljabar ukb coba2 kelas 11Limit aljabar ukb coba2 kelas 11
Limit aljabar ukb coba2 kelas 11Amphie Yuurisman
 
January 20, 2015
January 20, 2015January 20, 2015
January 20, 2015khyps13
 
Diabolic Str8ts #6, #7, and #9
Diabolic Str8ts #6, #7, and #9Diabolic Str8ts #6, #7, and #9
Diabolic Str8ts #6, #7, and #9SlowThinker
 
January 21, 2015
January 21, 2015January 21, 2015
January 21, 2015khyps13
 

Was ist angesagt? (17)

IIT JEE Maths 1998
IIT JEE Maths   1998IIT JEE Maths   1998
IIT JEE Maths 1998
 
Solving polynomial inequalities by graphing
Solving polynomial inequalities by graphingSolving polynomial inequalities by graphing
Solving polynomial inequalities by graphing
 
Applied Calculus Chapter 1 polar coordinates and vector
Applied Calculus Chapter  1 polar coordinates and vectorApplied Calculus Chapter  1 polar coordinates and vector
Applied Calculus Chapter 1 polar coordinates and vector
 
12 practice paper_3_h_-_set_a_mark_scheme
12 practice paper_3_h_-_set_a_mark_scheme12 practice paper_3_h_-_set_a_mark_scheme
12 practice paper_3_h_-_set_a_mark_scheme
 
Introduction to sequences and series
Introduction to sequences and seriesIntroduction to sequences and series
Introduction to sequences and series
 
IIT JEE - Mathematics 2009 i
IIT JEE  - Mathematics  2009  iIIT JEE  - Mathematics  2009  i
IIT JEE - Mathematics 2009 i
 
Unit 2_higher mark_scheme_march_2011 unit 2
 Unit 2_higher mark_scheme_march_2011 unit 2 Unit 2_higher mark_scheme_march_2011 unit 2
Unit 2_higher mark_scheme_march_2011 unit 2
 
Chapters Summary (X class)
Chapters Summary (X class)Chapters Summary (X class)
Chapters Summary (X class)
 
(Mhs)2 calculator enrichment
(Mhs)2 calculator enrichment(Mhs)2 calculator enrichment
(Mhs)2 calculator enrichment
 
Chapter 2 : EQUATIONS AND INEQUALITIES
Chapter 2 : EQUATIONS AND INEQUALITIESChapter 2 : EQUATIONS AND INEQUALITIES
Chapter 2 : EQUATIONS AND INEQUALITIES
 
Chapter 1 sequences and series lesson
Chapter 1 sequences and series lessonChapter 1 sequences and series lesson
Chapter 1 sequences and series lesson
 
Nbhm m. a. and m.sc. scholarship test 2005
Nbhm m. a. and m.sc. scholarship test 2005Nbhm m. a. and m.sc. scholarship test 2005
Nbhm m. a. and m.sc. scholarship test 2005
 
Aditya Class 8th
Aditya Class 8thAditya Class 8th
Aditya Class 8th
 
Limit aljabar ukb coba2 kelas 11
Limit aljabar ukb coba2 kelas 11Limit aljabar ukb coba2 kelas 11
Limit aljabar ukb coba2 kelas 11
 
January 20, 2015
January 20, 2015January 20, 2015
January 20, 2015
 
Diabolic Str8ts #6, #7, and #9
Diabolic Str8ts #6, #7, and #9Diabolic Str8ts #6, #7, and #9
Diabolic Str8ts #6, #7, and #9
 
January 21, 2015
January 21, 2015January 21, 2015
January 21, 2015
 

Ähnlich wie An Adaptive Evolutionary Algorithm based on Non-Euclidean Geometry for Many-Objective Optimization

Arithmatic & algebra
Arithmatic & algebraArithmatic & algebra
Arithmatic & algebraRushabh Vora
 
Problem Solving by Computer Finite Element Method
Problem Solving by Computer Finite Element MethodProblem Solving by Computer Finite Element Method
Problem Solving by Computer Finite Element MethodPeter Herbert
 
n this module, I include a file called Bisection Technique. I us
n this module, I include a file called Bisection Technique. I usn this module, I include a file called Bisection Technique. I us
n this module, I include a file called Bisection Technique. I usEstelaJeffery653
 
Practical computation of Hecke operators
Practical computation of Hecke operatorsPractical computation of Hecke operators
Practical computation of Hecke operatorsMathieu Dutour Sikiric
 
HKFMathFundas.pdf
HKFMathFundas.pdfHKFMathFundas.pdf
HKFMathFundas.pdfDOPEX13
 
1.3 Distance and Midpoint Formulas
1.3 Distance and Midpoint Formulas1.3 Distance and Midpoint Formulas
1.3 Distance and Midpoint Formulassmiller5
 
Regret Minimization in Multi-objective Submodular Function Maximization
Regret Minimization in Multi-objective Submodular Function MaximizationRegret Minimization in Multi-objective Submodular Function Maximization
Regret Minimization in Multi-objective Submodular Function MaximizationTasuku Soma
 
Combinatorics of 4-dimensional Resultant Polytopes
Combinatorics of 4-dimensional Resultant PolytopesCombinatorics of 4-dimensional Resultant Polytopes
Combinatorics of 4-dimensional Resultant PolytopesVissarion Fisikopoulos
 
Chap7 2 Ecc Intro
Chap7 2 Ecc IntroChap7 2 Ecc Intro
Chap7 2 Ecc IntroEdora Aziz
 
Adomian Decomposition Method for Certain Space-Time Fractional Partial Differ...
Adomian Decomposition Method for Certain Space-Time Fractional Partial Differ...Adomian Decomposition Method for Certain Space-Time Fractional Partial Differ...
Adomian Decomposition Method for Certain Space-Time Fractional Partial Differ...IOSR Journals
 
Muzammil Abdulrahman PPT On Gabor Wavelet Transform (GWT) Based Facial Expres...
Muzammil Abdulrahman PPT On Gabor Wavelet Transform (GWT) Based Facial Expres...Muzammil Abdulrahman PPT On Gabor Wavelet Transform (GWT) Based Facial Expres...
Muzammil Abdulrahman PPT On Gabor Wavelet Transform (GWT) Based Facial Expres...Petroleum Training Institute
 
Darmon Points for fields of mixed signature
Darmon Points for fields of mixed signatureDarmon Points for fields of mixed signature
Darmon Points for fields of mixed signaturemmasdeu
 
Number Theory for Security
Number Theory for SecurityNumber Theory for Security
Number Theory for SecurityAbhijit Mondal
 
Some properties of m sequences over finite field fp
Some properties of m sequences over finite field fpSome properties of m sequences over finite field fp
Some properties of m sequences over finite field fpIAEME Publication
 
Factors of polynomial
Factors of polynomialFactors of polynomial
Factors of polynomialRochelleOliva
 
Antwoorden fourier and laplace transforms, manual solutions
Antwoorden   fourier and laplace transforms, manual solutionsAntwoorden   fourier and laplace transforms, manual solutions
Antwoorden fourier and laplace transforms, manual solutionsHildemar Alvarez
 

Ähnlich wie An Adaptive Evolutionary Algorithm based on Non-Euclidean Geometry for Many-Objective Optimization (20)

Enumeration of 2-level polytopes
Enumeration of 2-level polytopesEnumeration of 2-level polytopes
Enumeration of 2-level polytopes
 
Arithmatic & algebra
Arithmatic & algebraArithmatic & algebra
Arithmatic & algebra
 
Problem Solving by Computer Finite Element Method
Problem Solving by Computer Finite Element MethodProblem Solving by Computer Finite Element Method
Problem Solving by Computer Finite Element Method
 
n this module, I include a file called Bisection Technique. I us
n this module, I include a file called Bisection Technique. I usn this module, I include a file called Bisection Technique. I us
n this module, I include a file called Bisection Technique. I us
 
Practical computation of Hecke operators
Practical computation of Hecke operatorsPractical computation of Hecke operators
Practical computation of Hecke operators
 
HKFMathFundas.pdf
HKFMathFundas.pdfHKFMathFundas.pdf
HKFMathFundas.pdf
 
Ch08
Ch08Ch08
Ch08
 
1.3 Distance and Midpoint Formulas
1.3 Distance and Midpoint Formulas1.3 Distance and Midpoint Formulas
1.3 Distance and Midpoint Formulas
 
Regret Minimization in Multi-objective Submodular Function Maximization
Regret Minimization in Multi-objective Submodular Function MaximizationRegret Minimization in Multi-objective Submodular Function Maximization
Regret Minimization in Multi-objective Submodular Function Maximization
 
Combinatorics of 4-dimensional Resultant Polytopes
Combinatorics of 4-dimensional Resultant PolytopesCombinatorics of 4-dimensional Resultant Polytopes
Combinatorics of 4-dimensional Resultant Polytopes
 
Chap7 2 Ecc Intro
Chap7 2 Ecc IntroChap7 2 Ecc Intro
Chap7 2 Ecc Intro
 
Adomian Decomposition Method for Certain Space-Time Fractional Partial Differ...
Adomian Decomposition Method for Certain Space-Time Fractional Partial Differ...Adomian Decomposition Method for Certain Space-Time Fractional Partial Differ...
Adomian Decomposition Method for Certain Space-Time Fractional Partial Differ...
 
Muzammil Abdulrahman PPT On Gabor Wavelet Transform (GWT) Based Facial Expres...
Muzammil Abdulrahman PPT On Gabor Wavelet Transform (GWT) Based Facial Expres...Muzammil Abdulrahman PPT On Gabor Wavelet Transform (GWT) Based Facial Expres...
Muzammil Abdulrahman PPT On Gabor Wavelet Transform (GWT) Based Facial Expres...
 
Darmon Points for fields of mixed signature
Darmon Points for fields of mixed signatureDarmon Points for fields of mixed signature
Darmon Points for fields of mixed signature
 
QMC: Operator Splitting Workshop, Sparse Non-Parametric Regression - Noah Sim...
QMC: Operator Splitting Workshop, Sparse Non-Parametric Regression - Noah Sim...QMC: Operator Splitting Workshop, Sparse Non-Parametric Regression - Noah Sim...
QMC: Operator Splitting Workshop, Sparse Non-Parametric Regression - Noah Sim...
 
Complex%20numbers
Complex%20numbersComplex%20numbers
Complex%20numbers
 
Number Theory for Security
Number Theory for SecurityNumber Theory for Security
Number Theory for Security
 
Some properties of m sequences over finite field fp
Some properties of m sequences over finite field fpSome properties of m sequences over finite field fp
Some properties of m sequences over finite field fp
 
Factors of polynomial
Factors of polynomialFactors of polynomial
Factors of polynomial
 
Antwoorden fourier and laplace transforms, manual solutions
Antwoorden   fourier and laplace transforms, manual solutionsAntwoorden   fourier and laplace transforms, manual solutions
Antwoorden fourier and laplace transforms, manual solutions
 

Mehr von Annibale Panichella

Searching for Quality: Genetic Algorithms and Metamorphic Testing for Softwar...
Searching for Quality: Genetic Algorithms and Metamorphic Testing for Softwar...Searching for Quality: Genetic Algorithms and Metamorphic Testing for Softwar...
Searching for Quality: Genetic Algorithms and Metamorphic Testing for Softwar...Annibale Panichella
 
A Fast Multi-objective Evolutionary Approach for Designing Large-Scale Optica...
A Fast Multi-objective Evolutionary Approach for Designing Large-Scale Optica...A Fast Multi-objective Evolutionary Approach for Designing Large-Scale Optica...
A Fast Multi-objective Evolutionary Approach for Designing Large-Scale Optica...Annibale Panichella
 
An Improved Pareto Front Modeling Algorithm for Large-scale Many-Objective Op...
An Improved Pareto Front Modeling Algorithm for Large-scale Many-Objective Op...An Improved Pareto Front Modeling Algorithm for Large-scale Many-Objective Op...
An Improved Pareto Front Modeling Algorithm for Large-scale Many-Objective Op...Annibale Panichella
 
Speeding-up Software Testing With Computational Intelligence
Speeding-up Software Testing With Computational IntelligenceSpeeding-up Software Testing With Computational Intelligence
Speeding-up Software Testing With Computational IntelligenceAnnibale Panichella
 
Incremental Control Dependency Frontier Exploration for Many-Criteria Test C...
Incremental Control Dependency Frontier Exploration for Many-Criteria  Test C...Incremental Control Dependency Frontier Exploration for Many-Criteria  Test C...
Incremental Control Dependency Frontier Exploration for Many-Criteria Test C...Annibale Panichella
 
Java Unit Testing Tool Competition — Fifth Round
Java Unit Testing Tool Competition — Fifth RoundJava Unit Testing Tool Competition — Fifth Round
Java Unit Testing Tool Competition — Fifth RoundAnnibale Panichella
 
Evolutionary Testing for Crash Reproduction
Evolutionary Testing for Crash ReproductionEvolutionary Testing for Crash Reproduction
Evolutionary Testing for Crash ReproductionAnnibale Panichella
 
Parameterizing and Assembling IR-based Solutions for SE Tasks using Genetic A...
Parameterizing and Assembling IR-based Solutions for SE Tasks using Genetic A...Parameterizing and Assembling IR-based Solutions for SE Tasks using Genetic A...
Parameterizing and Assembling IR-based Solutions for SE Tasks using Genetic A...Annibale Panichella
 
Security Threat Identification and Testing
Security Threat Identification and TestingSecurity Threat Identification and Testing
Security Threat Identification and TestingAnnibale Panichella
 
Reformulating Branch Coverage as a Many-Objective Optimization Problem
Reformulating Branch Coverage as a Many-Objective Optimization ProblemReformulating Branch Coverage as a Many-Objective Optimization Problem
Reformulating Branch Coverage as a Many-Objective Optimization ProblemAnnibale Panichella
 
Results for EvoSuite-MOSA at the Third Unit Testing Tool Competition
Results for EvoSuite-MOSA at the Third Unit Testing Tool CompetitionResults for EvoSuite-MOSA at the Third Unit Testing Tool Competition
Results for EvoSuite-MOSA at the Third Unit Testing Tool CompetitionAnnibale Panichella
 
Adaptive User Feedback for IR-based Traceability Recovery
Adaptive User Feedback for IR-based Traceability RecoveryAdaptive User Feedback for IR-based Traceability Recovery
Adaptive User Feedback for IR-based Traceability RecoveryAnnibale Panichella
 
Diversity mechanisms for evolutionary populations in Search-Based Software En...
Diversity mechanisms for evolutionary populations in Search-Based Software En...Diversity mechanisms for evolutionary populations in Search-Based Software En...
Diversity mechanisms for evolutionary populations in Search-Based Software En...Annibale Panichella
 
Estimating the Evolution Direction of Populations to Improve Genetic Algorithms
Estimating the Evolution Direction of Populations to Improve Genetic AlgorithmsEstimating the Evolution Direction of Populations to Improve Genetic Algorithms
Estimating the Evolution Direction of Populations to Improve Genetic AlgorithmsAnnibale Panichella
 
When and How Using Structural Information to Improve IR-Based Traceability Re...
When and How Using Structural Information to Improve IR-Based Traceability Re...When and How Using Structural Information to Improve IR-Based Traceability Re...
When and How Using Structural Information to Improve IR-Based Traceability Re...Annibale Panichella
 
Multi-Objective Cross-Project Defect Prediction
Multi-Objective Cross-Project Defect PredictionMulti-Objective Cross-Project Defect Prediction
Multi-Objective Cross-Project Defect PredictionAnnibale Panichella
 

Mehr von Annibale Panichella (20)

Searching for Quality: Genetic Algorithms and Metamorphic Testing for Softwar...
Searching for Quality: Genetic Algorithms and Metamorphic Testing for Softwar...Searching for Quality: Genetic Algorithms and Metamorphic Testing for Softwar...
Searching for Quality: Genetic Algorithms and Metamorphic Testing for Softwar...
 
A Fast Multi-objective Evolutionary Approach for Designing Large-Scale Optica...
A Fast Multi-objective Evolutionary Approach for Designing Large-Scale Optica...A Fast Multi-objective Evolutionary Approach for Designing Large-Scale Optica...
A Fast Multi-objective Evolutionary Approach for Designing Large-Scale Optica...
 
An Improved Pareto Front Modeling Algorithm for Large-scale Many-Objective Op...
An Improved Pareto Front Modeling Algorithm for Large-scale Many-Objective Op...An Improved Pareto Front Modeling Algorithm for Large-scale Many-Objective Op...
An Improved Pareto Front Modeling Algorithm for Large-scale Many-Objective Op...
 
VST2022.pdf
VST2022.pdfVST2022.pdf
VST2022.pdf
 
IPA Fall Days 2019
 IPA Fall Days 2019 IPA Fall Days 2019
IPA Fall Days 2019
 
Speeding-up Software Testing With Computational Intelligence
Speeding-up Software Testing With Computational IntelligenceSpeeding-up Software Testing With Computational Intelligence
Speeding-up Software Testing With Computational Intelligence
 
Incremental Control Dependency Frontier Exploration for Many-Criteria Test C...
Incremental Control Dependency Frontier Exploration for Many-Criteria  Test C...Incremental Control Dependency Frontier Exploration for Many-Criteria  Test C...
Incremental Control Dependency Frontier Exploration for Many-Criteria Test C...
 
Sbst2018 contest2018
Sbst2018 contest2018Sbst2018 contest2018
Sbst2018 contest2018
 
Java Unit Testing Tool Competition — Fifth Round
Java Unit Testing Tool Competition — Fifth RoundJava Unit Testing Tool Competition — Fifth Round
Java Unit Testing Tool Competition — Fifth Round
 
ICSE 2017 - Evocrash
ICSE 2017 - EvocrashICSE 2017 - Evocrash
ICSE 2017 - Evocrash
 
Evolutionary Testing for Crash Reproduction
Evolutionary Testing for Crash ReproductionEvolutionary Testing for Crash Reproduction
Evolutionary Testing for Crash Reproduction
 
Parameterizing and Assembling IR-based Solutions for SE Tasks using Genetic A...
Parameterizing and Assembling IR-based Solutions for SE Tasks using Genetic A...Parameterizing and Assembling IR-based Solutions for SE Tasks using Genetic A...
Parameterizing and Assembling IR-based Solutions for SE Tasks using Genetic A...
 
Security Threat Identification and Testing
Security Threat Identification and TestingSecurity Threat Identification and Testing
Security Threat Identification and Testing
 
Reformulating Branch Coverage as a Many-Objective Optimization Problem
Reformulating Branch Coverage as a Many-Objective Optimization ProblemReformulating Branch Coverage as a Many-Objective Optimization Problem
Reformulating Branch Coverage as a Many-Objective Optimization Problem
 
Results for EvoSuite-MOSA at the Third Unit Testing Tool Competition
Results for EvoSuite-MOSA at the Third Unit Testing Tool CompetitionResults for EvoSuite-MOSA at the Third Unit Testing Tool Competition
Results for EvoSuite-MOSA at the Third Unit Testing Tool Competition
 
Adaptive User Feedback for IR-based Traceability Recovery
Adaptive User Feedback for IR-based Traceability RecoveryAdaptive User Feedback for IR-based Traceability Recovery
Adaptive User Feedback for IR-based Traceability Recovery
 
Diversity mechanisms for evolutionary populations in Search-Based Software En...
Diversity mechanisms for evolutionary populations in Search-Based Software En...Diversity mechanisms for evolutionary populations in Search-Based Software En...
Diversity mechanisms for evolutionary populations in Search-Based Software En...
 
Estimating the Evolution Direction of Populations to Improve Genetic Algorithms
Estimating the Evolution Direction of Populations to Improve Genetic AlgorithmsEstimating the Evolution Direction of Populations to Improve Genetic Algorithms
Estimating the Evolution Direction of Populations to Improve Genetic Algorithms
 
When and How Using Structural Information to Improve IR-Based Traceability Re...
When and How Using Structural Information to Improve IR-Based Traceability Re...When and How Using Structural Information to Improve IR-Based Traceability Re...
When and How Using Structural Information to Improve IR-Based Traceability Re...
 
Multi-Objective Cross-Project Defect Prediction
Multi-Objective Cross-Project Defect PredictionMulti-Objective Cross-Project Defect Prediction
Multi-Objective Cross-Project Defect Prediction
 

Kürzlich hochgeladen

ISO 25964-1Working Group ISO/TC 46/SC 9/WG 8
ISO 25964-1Working Group ISO/TC 46/SC 9/WG 8ISO 25964-1Working Group ISO/TC 46/SC 9/WG 8
ISO 25964-1Working Group ISO/TC 46/SC 9/WG 8Access Innovations, Inc.
 
Burning Issue presentation of Zhazgul N. , Cycle 54
Burning Issue presentation of Zhazgul N. , Cycle 54Burning Issue presentation of Zhazgul N. , Cycle 54
Burning Issue presentation of Zhazgul N. , Cycle 54ZhazgulNurdinova
 
Communication Accommodation Theory Kaylyn Benton.pptx
Communication Accommodation Theory Kaylyn Benton.pptxCommunication Accommodation Theory Kaylyn Benton.pptx
Communication Accommodation Theory Kaylyn Benton.pptxkb31670
 
Machine learning workshop, CZU Prague 2024
Machine learning workshop, CZU Prague 2024Machine learning workshop, CZU Prague 2024
Machine learning workshop, CZU Prague 2024Gokulks007
 
Juan Pablo Sugiura - eCommerce Day Bolivia 2024
Juan Pablo Sugiura - eCommerce Day Bolivia 2024Juan Pablo Sugiura - eCommerce Day Bolivia 2024
Juan Pablo Sugiura - eCommerce Day Bolivia 2024eCommerce Institute
 
Communication Accommodation Theory Kaylyn Benton.pptx
Communication Accommodation Theory Kaylyn Benton.pptxCommunication Accommodation Theory Kaylyn Benton.pptx
Communication Accommodation Theory Kaylyn Benton.pptxkb31670
 
The Real Story Of Project Manager/Scrum Master From Where It Came?!
The Real Story Of Project Manager/Scrum Master From Where It Came?!The Real Story Of Project Manager/Scrum Master From Where It Came?!
The Real Story Of Project Manager/Scrum Master From Where It Came?!Loay Mohamed Ibrahim Aly
 
Dynamics of Professional Presentationpdf
Dynamics of Professional PresentationpdfDynamics of Professional Presentationpdf
Dynamics of Professional Presentationpdfravleel42
 

Kürzlich hochgeladen (8)

ISO 25964-1Working Group ISO/TC 46/SC 9/WG 8
ISO 25964-1Working Group ISO/TC 46/SC 9/WG 8ISO 25964-1Working Group ISO/TC 46/SC 9/WG 8
ISO 25964-1Working Group ISO/TC 46/SC 9/WG 8
 
Burning Issue presentation of Zhazgul N. , Cycle 54
Burning Issue presentation of Zhazgul N. , Cycle 54Burning Issue presentation of Zhazgul N. , Cycle 54
Burning Issue presentation of Zhazgul N. , Cycle 54
 
Communication Accommodation Theory Kaylyn Benton.pptx
Communication Accommodation Theory Kaylyn Benton.pptxCommunication Accommodation Theory Kaylyn Benton.pptx
Communication Accommodation Theory Kaylyn Benton.pptx
 
Machine learning workshop, CZU Prague 2024
Machine learning workshop, CZU Prague 2024Machine learning workshop, CZU Prague 2024
Machine learning workshop, CZU Prague 2024
 
Juan Pablo Sugiura - eCommerce Day Bolivia 2024
Juan Pablo Sugiura - eCommerce Day Bolivia 2024Juan Pablo Sugiura - eCommerce Day Bolivia 2024
Juan Pablo Sugiura - eCommerce Day Bolivia 2024
 
Communication Accommodation Theory Kaylyn Benton.pptx
Communication Accommodation Theory Kaylyn Benton.pptxCommunication Accommodation Theory Kaylyn Benton.pptx
Communication Accommodation Theory Kaylyn Benton.pptx
 
The Real Story Of Project Manager/Scrum Master From Where It Came?!
The Real Story Of Project Manager/Scrum Master From Where It Came?!The Real Story Of Project Manager/Scrum Master From Where It Came?!
The Real Story Of Project Manager/Scrum Master From Where It Came?!
 
Dynamics of Professional Presentationpdf
Dynamics of Professional PresentationpdfDynamics of Professional Presentationpdf
Dynamics of Professional Presentationpdf
 

An Adaptive Evolutionary Algorithm based on Non-Euclidean Geometry for Many-Objective Optimization

  • 1. An Adaptive Evolutionary Algorithm Based on Non-Euclidean Geometry for Many- Objective Optimization Annibale Panichella a.panichella@tudelf.nl @AnniPanic !1
  • 2. Proximity and Diversity !2 Convergence (proximity) Diversity (spread) Crowding distance NichesGrids Angle distance Reference Points Dominance Box-dominance θ-dominance ε-dominance
  • 3. The Challenge • How to measure proximity and diversity depends on the shape of the Pareto Front • We don’t know what is the PF shape (geometry) a priori !3 Elliptic Geometry Hyperbolic Geometry
  • 4. Pareto Front Modelling !4 (f1)p+(f2)p+…+(fM)p =1 [Martínez et al. PPSN 2014] Family of Curves 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 MOPs with two and three objective functions. *Image from p
 p p p p Non-linear fitting Solved with (iterative) numerical methods
  • 5. Pareto Front Modelling !5 a1(f1) +a2(f2) +…+aM(fM) = K [Tian et al. IEEE Tans. Cyber. 2018] p1 p2 pM a1, a2, …, aM ≥ 0 p1, p2, …, pM ≥ 0 Generalized Fitting Model (GFM) Complexity: O(G' *′M2(M + N)) M = #Objectives N = Pop. Size G' = #Iterations of the Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm
  • 6. Pareto Front Modelling !6 Time(s) 0 30 60 90 120 # Objectives M=3 M=5 M=10 M=15 NSGA-II GFM-MOEA Problem = DTLZ1 Pop. Size = 200 # Gen. = 300 M = {3, 5, 10, 15}
  • 8. The Framework !8 An Adaptive Evolutionary Algorithm based on Non-Euclidean Geometry GECCO ’19, July 13–17, 2019, Prague, Czech Republic Algorithm 1: AGE-MOEA Input: M: Number of objectives N : Population size Result: Final population P 1 begin 2 P RANDOM-POPULATION(N ) 3 while not (stop_condition) do 4 Q GENERATE-OFFSPRING(P) 5 F FAST-NONDOMINATED-SORT(P – Q) 6 F NORMALIZE(F) 7 p GET-GEOMETRY(F1, M) /* Equation 8 */ 8 d 1 /* First non-dominated rank */ 9 while | P | + | Fd |6 N do 10 SURVIVAL-SCORE(Fd , d, p) 11 P P – Fd 12 d d + 1 13 SORT(Fd ) /* by survival scores */ 14 P P – Fd [1 : (N |P |)] 15 return P front. First, we present an overview of the proposed framework in Section 3.1. Then, we detail the key ingredients of AGE-MOEA in Sections 3.2, 3.3, and 3.4. 3.1 Overview Finally, the new population of M solutions is formed by selecting the solutions from the non-dominated fronts, one front (or level) at a time. Therefore, the solutions from the rst front F1 are selected rst, followed by F2, and so on. The procedure terminates when adding the solutions of the current non-dominated front Fd would exceed M. In this case, AGE-MOEA selects the remaining solutions from Fd according to the descending order of their survival scores (lines 13-14 of Algorithm 1). The survival scores play an important role during reproduction as well. Indeed, parents are selected from the current population P using the binary tournament selection: a pair of solutions is randomly selected from P; the winner of the tournament is the solution with the best non-dominated rank (or level) or the solution with the largest survival score at the same level of non-dominated rank. 3.2 Normalization The rst non-dominated front F1 is rescaled and normalized by applying the same formula used in NSGA-III [10]: f n i (S) = [(fi (S) zmin i ]/ai 8S 2 F1 (4) where fi (S) denotes the objective fi for the solution S and zmin i is the minimum value of the i-th objective across all solutions in the front F1. With the numerator, the objectives are translated to have the ideal point equal to the origin of the axes. The denominator ai is the intercept of the M-dimensional hyperplane with the objective AGE-MOEA inherits the main framework on NSGA-II. The main differences are: 1. Normalization 2. A Simple heuristic to estimate the geometry with complexity O(M x N) 3. Replacing the crowding distance with the survival score (proximity + diversity)
  • 9. Normalization !9 Population at gen. t 1. Apply the non-dominated sorting 2. Identify the first front F1 3. Normalize F1 with the formula fni (S) = [(fi(S) − zmini ]/ai ∀S ∈ F1 ai is the intercept of the M-dimensional hyperplane with the objective axis fi 4. Normalize the other fronts (F2, F3) using the values zmini and ai computed from F1 F1 F2 F3 4 10 (2, 3)
  • 10. Simplify the Fitting Equation !10 4 10 1 1 (0,0) Before Normalization After Normalization Ideal Point (1,1) a1(f1) +a2(f2) +…+aM(fM) =Kp1 p2 pM (f1) +(f2) +…+(fM) =1p1 p2 pM (0,0)
  • 11. Simplify the Fitting Equation !11 (f1) +(f2) +…+(fM) =1p1 p2 pM • Exponential equation with no exact solutions • We still need numerical (iterative) methods for fitting • We want to find the values p1…pM such that the error of the fitting is minimum
  • 12. The Idea !12 • Don't solve the exponential equation • Look at points in the front for which the equation is easily solvable f1 f2 (1,1) A B C(c1,c2) (f1) +(f2) +…+(fM) =1p1 p2 pM
  • 13. The Idea !13 f1 f2 (1,1) A B C(c1,c2) (c1) +(c2) +…+(cM) =1p p p (f1) +(f2) +…+(fM) =1p1 p2 pM M * (c1) =1p p = - log(M) log(c1)
  • 14. Estimating the Geometry !14 f1 f2 (1,1) A B C 1. Find the point C(c1, c2,…, cM) in F1 with minimum angle distance to the bisector 2. Compute p using the formula: 0.5 1 1.5 B=(1,0) C=(0.5, 0.5) F=(0.9, 0.25) f1 f central point C of a normalized non- treme points in the front correspond to the nt with the objective axes. After normaliza- oint of F1 with the axis f n i has the objective bjectives f n j = 0 for j , i. Furthermore, its of the axes (ideal point) is always equal to ent is chosen. This is because an extreme (f n 1 (E) = 0, . . . , f n i (E) = 1, . . . , f n M (E) = 0) o: E)p + · · · + f n i (E)p + · · · + f M 1 (E)p ⌘1/p + · · · + 1p + · · · + 0p 1/p = 1 observation, our tting problem consists in ystem of non-linear equations: 1)p + · · · + fM (S1)p )1/p = 1 k )p + · · · + fM (Sk )p )1/p = 1 (5) whose exact solution is p = 1. In general, given a generic central pointC that lies on the bis of the rst quadrant ( Æ), the solution to the equation ||C||p is: M’ i=1 C p i !1/p = 1 ! M · C p 1 = 1 ! C p 1 = 1/Mx ! p = lo (M) lo (C1) where Ci denotes the i-th coordinate of the central point C. In the equation above, we assumed that the Ci lies exact the bisector of the rst quadrant. However, in practice, the ce point of a generic non-dominated front F1 may have a dist dist?(C, Æ) 0 and, thus, its coordinates in the objective spac not identical. For this reason, in AGE-MOEA (line 7 of Algorith we approximate the value of the exponent p using the equati p = lo (M) lo ⇣ 1 M ÕM i=1 Ci ⌘ = lo (M) lo (M) lo ⇣ÕM i=1 Ci ⌘ where M is the number of objectives; C is the central point and computed with Equation 6; and Ci is the i-th coordina C in the objective space. Since the coordinates of C cannot b zero (otherwise C would coincide with the ideal point) nor all e to ones (otherwise it would coincide with the nadir point) summation ÕM i=1 Ci is always greater than zero and lower tha This implies that the denominator in Equation 8 is always Overall complexity O(M x N)
  • 15. The Survival Score !15 An Adaptive Evolutionary Algorithm based on Non-Euclidean Geometry GECCO ’19, July 13–17, 2019, Prague, Czech Republic Algorithm 2: SURVIVAL-SCORE Input: Fd : pool of non-dominated solutions d: index of the non-dominated front p: exponent of estimated geometry the p-norm 1 begin 2 if d==1 then 3 score[E] +1 /* E = extreme points of F1 */ 4 E /* Considered solutions */ 5 Fd /* Remaining solutions */ 6 for each solution S 2 do 7 proximity[S] ||f (S)||p 8 for each solution S1 2 Fd do 9 for each solution S2 2 Fd do 10 dist[S1, S2] ||f (S1) f (S2))||p 11 while | | 0 do 12 for each S 2 do 13 diversity[S] min T 2 dist[S, T ] + min2 T 2 dist[S, T ] 14 value[S] diversity[S] proximity[S] /* Select the solution with the max value */ 15 S⇤ arg max S2 value[S] 16 score[S⇤] value[S⇤] 17 – {S⇤ } /* Considered solutions */ 18 {S⇤ } /* Remaining solutions */ 19 else 20 for each S 2 F1 do 21 score[S] 1/||f (S)||p point C in Figure 1). A solution S with proximit (S) 1 dominates parts of the unitary hypersurface of Lp (e.g., point D in Figure 1). Equation 9, while the pairwise Lp distances between all solutions in F1 are computed in lines 8-10. Then, the survival score is computed within the loop in lines 12-14. In each loop, the procedure computes the diversity score for the solutions in considering the minimum (min) and the second minimum (min2) distances with regards to the solution in (line 13 of Algorithm 2). In this way, the diversity of a solution S is computed with regards to solutions that have already been scored (or selected) in the previous iterations of the loop rather than considering all solutions in F1. A temporary survival score (value[S] in line 14) is then computed for each solution S 2 . The solution S⇤ with the maximum temporary score in is selected (line 15), and its nal survival score is assigned in line 16. Then, the two sets and are updated in lines 17-18. The temporary survival scores for the remaining solutions in are recomputed in the next iterations since we need to recompute their relative diversity with regards to the updated set . Finally, the survival scores for the solutions in the non-dominated fronts Fd1 are computed as the inverse of their proximity scores (lines 19-21 in Algorithm 2). Hence, dominated solutions closer to the unitary hypersurface induced by Lp have larger scores. Complexity. The computational complexity of Algorithm 2 is O(M ⇥ N2) + O(N3), where M is the number of objectives and N is the population size. The elements of the overall complexity are: • O(M ⇥ N) for computing the proximity scores in lines 6-7. • O(M ⇥ N2) for computing the distances for each pair of solutions in F1 (lines 8-10); • O(N3) for the loop in lines 11-18. More specically, the inner loop in line 12-14 has a complexity O(| | ⇥ | |) and it is repeated | | (outer loop in line 11), where ✓ F1 and ✓ F1. • O(M ⇥N) is the complexity for computing the survival score for the fronts Fd1. 4 EMPIRICAL STUDY Extreme points have maximum (+inf) survival score Proximity of each non-dominated point is computed using the norm || · ||p Compute the pairwise distance between non-dominated points using the norm || · ||p Iteratively select the solution with the better score w.r.t. to already the selected solutions Score[S] = proximity[S] diversity[S] Normalized diversity
  • 17. Maf Benchmark !17 Maf1 Linear, Inverted Maf2 Concave Maf3 Convex, Multimodal Maf4 Concave, Multimodal Maf5 Convex, Biased Maf6 Concave, Degenerate Maf7 Mixed, disconnected, Multimodal Maf8 Linear, Degenerate Maf9 Linear, Degenerate Maf10 Mixed, Biased Maf11 Convex, Disconnected, Non-separable Maf12 Concave, Nonseparable, Biased DeceptiveMaf13 Concave, Unimodal, Non-separable, DegenerateMaf14 Linear, Partially separable, Large Scale Maf15 Convex, Partially separable, Large Scale R. Cheng et al. A benchmark test suite for evolutionary many-objective optimization. Complex and Intelligent Systems 2017 True PFs for M=3
  • 18. Baselines • AR-MOEA [Y. Tian et al. 2018] • GrEA [S. Yang et al. 2013] • NSGA-III [Deb and Jain 2014] • MOEA/D [Zang and Li 2007] • θ-DEA [Yuan et al. 2016] !18 Indicator-based with reference point adaptation Grid-based θ-dominance (relaxed dominance) Reference points-based + Dominance Decomposition-based
  • 19. Parameter Setting !19 Parameters M=3 M=5 M=10 Population size N 91* 210* 275* N. of fitness evaluations N*300 27300 63000 82500 SBX probability pc = 1 SBX distributed index ηc = 30 Polynomial mutation prob. Pm = 1/n Mutation distr. index ηc = 20 M = # Objectives # Ref. Points needed by NSGA-III and MOEA/D n = # decision variables * Das and Dennis systematic approach
  • 20. Results for M=3 !20 An Adaptive Evolutionary Algorithm based on Non-Euclidean Geometry GECCO ’19, July 13–17, 2019, Prague, Czech Republic Table 3: IGD values (mean and standard deviation) achieved by the AGE-MOEA and the baselines on the Maf benchmark [2] with M=3,5, and 10 objectives. Best performance is highlighted in grey color. Problem M AR-MOEA GrEA NSGA-III MOEA/D -DEA AGE-MOEA MaF1 3 4.3854e-2 (5.49e-4) # 4.2393e-2 (8.39e-4) 6.1953e-2 (2.14e-3) # 7.0473e-2 (7.88e-6) # 8.0706e-2 (7.20e-4) # 4.3056e-2 (4.25e-4) MaF2 3 3.2100e-2 (7.71e-4) # 3.1930e-2 (4.52e-4) # 3.6179e-2 (8.14e-4) # 4.1280e-2 (1.37e-3) # 3.6522e-2 (3.46e-4) # 3.1031e-2 (6.56e-4) MaF3 3 1.5462e+0 (1.97e+0) # 9.9568e-1 (1.98e+0) # 2.3782e+0 (3.59e+0) # 3.1098e-1 (6.76e-1) 3.3974e+0 (5.63e+0) # 5.1510e-1 (1.41e+0) MaF4 3 1.2607e+0 (2.01e+0) # 1.3245e+0 (1.58e+0) # 3.1889e+0 (2.92e+0) # 2.1207e+0 (9.71e-1) # 1.4392e+0 (1.83e+0) # 7.5761e-1 (1.20e+0) MaF5 3 1.0265e+0 (1.27e+0) # 9.3317e-1 (1.02e+0) # 7.1456e-1 (1.00e+0) # 1.2690e+0 (1.43e+0) # 8.1065e-1 (7.54e-1) # 3.0978e-1 (3.24e-1) MaF6 3 5.1379e-3 (1.18e-4) 2.0989e-2 (5.84e-4) # 1.4955e-2 (1.60e-3) # 7.9072e-2 (1.26e-1) # 3.3136e-2 (2.58e-3) # 5.4330e-3 (1.12e-4) MaF7 3 1.9735e-1 (2.33e-1) # 8.6453e-2 (4.81e-3) 7.8716e-2 (3.87e-3) 1.7749e-1 (1.18e-1) # 1.0860e-1 (6.88e-2) # 9.1365e-2 (8.64e-2) MaF8 3 9.5006e-2 (2.01e-2) # 8.6955e-2 (1.29e-2) # 1.3148e-1 (3.37e-2) # 2.9967e-1 (2.41e-1) # 1.9169e-1 (4.90e-2) # 7.8517e-2 (1.46e-2) MaF9 3 8.1383e-2 (2.71e-2) # 4.6689e-1 (2.05e-1) # 8.9195e-2 (2.26e-2) # 1.3979e-1 (5.23e-2) # 8.4144e-2 (2.14e-2) # 6.8064e-2 (7.43e-3) MaF10 3 3.3521e-1 (5.23e-2) # 2.4991e-1 (4.80e-2) ⇡ 4.3074e-1 (7.67e-2) # 5.7938e-1 (9.34e-2) # 3.9627e-1 (6.32e-2) # 2.2889e-1 (3.52e-2) MaF11 3 1.6268e-1 (1.30e-3) 2.3696e-1 (1.24e-2) # 1.6323e-1 (2.67e-3) 2.6705e-1 (6.22e-2) # 1.5653e-1 (1.51e-3) 1.7044e-1 (3.47e-3) MaF12 3 2.2402e-1 (3.35e-3) ⇡ 2.5115e-1 (6.79e-3) # 2.3015e-1 (2.12e-2) # 2.9391e-1 (2.51e-2) # 2.2429e-1 (2.05e-3) ⇡ 2.2441e-1 (2.47e-3) MaF13 3 9.0600e-2 (7.82e-3) # 1.7135e-1 (2.59e-2) # 9.4125e-2 (9.68e-3) # 1.1631e-1 (3.33e-2) # 9.2006e-2 (8.73e-3) # 7.9967e-2 (4.42e-3) MaF14 3 9.8537e-1 (3.06e-1) ⇡ 1.3652e+0 (4.70e-1) # 1.2546e+0 (4.14e-1) # 6.1995e-1 (1.38e-1) 1.2979e+0 (4.95e-1) # 9.3860e-1 (3.08e-1) MaF15 3 3.8100e-1 (7.39e-2) ⇡ 5.8612e-1 (8.08e-2) # 7.2037e-1 (2.10e-1) # 3.7313e-1 (9.47e-2) 9.0553e-1 (8.52e-2) # 4.2139e-1 (9.32e-2) MaF1 5 1.1596e-1 (1.05e-3) # 1.2184e-1 (2.19e-3) # 1.8400e-1 (9.92e-3) # 1.5437e-1 (5.43e-2) # 2.0875e-1 (5.47e-3) # 1.1017e-1 (1.61e-3) MaF2 5 9.4906e-2 (1.16e-3) # 1.0120e-1 (1.42e-3) # 1.1296e-1 (3.08e-3) # 1.1078e-1 (2.96e-4) # 1.2384e-1 (2.71e-3) # 9.2976e-2 (1.10e-3) MaF3 5 1.5533e-1 (3.23e-1) # 1.9521e+0 (4.31e+0) # 1.3713e+0 (2.89e+0) # 1.0495e-1 (6.18e-3) # 9.3684e-2 (4.50e-3) # 5.4560e-2 (8.97e-4) MaF4 5 2.2834e+0 (9.02e-2) # 2.3563e+0 (1.59e+0) ⇡ 3.0028e+0 (1.85e+0) # 1.1559e+1 (1.15e+0) # 2.8182e+0 (2.11e-1) # 1.8275e+0 (6.47e-2) MaF5 5 1.9730e+0 (4.94e-3) # 1.9916e+0 (8.98e-1) # 2.0382e+0 (3.00e-1) # 7.5844e+0 (1.89e+0) # 1.9662e+0 (6.12e-3) # 1.7508e+0 (2.64e-2) MaF6 5 2.0461e-3 (4.15e-5) 3.5892e-2 (8.23e-4) # 1.6904e-2 (2.95e-3) # 1.1807e-1 (1.69e-1) # 8.1549e-2 (1.09e-2) # 2.4664e-3 (5.74e-5) MaF7 5 2.5829e-1 (5.15e-3) ⇡ 2.3492e-1 (5.23e-3) 2.8437e-1 (5.73e-3) # 5.1550e-1 (2.40e-2) # 3.0107e-1 (2.50e-2) # 2.5782e-1 (1.72e-2) MaF8 Mean and St. Dev. of the IGD across 50 runs ↑ means better than, ↓ worst than, and ≈ equivalent to AGE-MOEA
  • 21. Maf3 !21 M = 3 objectives, N = 190 solutions, 300 iterations IGD = 2.32e-2 IGD = 3.89e-2 IGD = 4.59e-2 IGD = 4.20e-2 IGD = 4.50e-2 IGD = 3.80e-2
  • 22. Results for M=5 !22 An Adaptive Evolutionary Algorithm based on Non-Euclidean Geometry GECCO ’19, July 13–17, 2019, Prague, Czech Republic Table 3: IGD values (mean and standard deviation) achieved by the AGE-MOEA and the baselines on the Maf benchmark [2] with M=3,5, and 10 objectives. Best performance is highlighted in grey color. Problem M AR-MOEA GrEA NSGA-III MOEA/D -DEA AGE-MOEA MaF1 3 4.3854e-2 (5.49e-4) # 4.2393e-2 (8.39e-4) 6.1953e-2 (2.14e-3) # 7.0473e-2 (7.88e-6) # 8.0706e-2 (7.20e-4) # 4.3056e-2 (4.25e-4) MaF2 3 3.2100e-2 (7.71e-4) # 3.1930e-2 (4.52e-4) # 3.6179e-2 (8.14e-4) # 4.1280e-2 (1.37e-3) # 3.6522e-2 (3.46e-4) # 3.1031e-2 (6.56e-4) MaF3 3 1.5462e+0 (1.97e+0) # 9.9568e-1 (1.98e+0) # 2.3782e+0 (3.59e+0) # 3.1098e-1 (6.76e-1) 3.3974e+0 (5.63e+0) # 5.1510e-1 (1.41e+0) MaF4 3 1.2607e+0 (2.01e+0) # 1.3245e+0 (1.58e+0) # 3.1889e+0 (2.92e+0) # 2.1207e+0 (9.71e-1) # 1.4392e+0 (1.83e+0) # 7.5761e-1 (1.20e+0) MaF5 3 1.0265e+0 (1.27e+0) # 9.3317e-1 (1.02e+0) # 7.1456e-1 (1.00e+0) # 1.2690e+0 (1.43e+0) # 8.1065e-1 (7.54e-1) # 3.0978e-1 (3.24e-1) MaF6 3 5.1379e-3 (1.18e-4) 2.0989e-2 (5.84e-4) # 1.4955e-2 (1.60e-3) # 7.9072e-2 (1.26e-1) # 3.3136e-2 (2.58e-3) # 5.4330e-3 (1.12e-4) MaF7 3 1.9735e-1 (2.33e-1) # 8.6453e-2 (4.81e-3) 7.8716e-2 (3.87e-3) 1.7749e-1 (1.18e-1) # 1.0860e-1 (6.88e-2) # 9.1365e-2 (8.64e-2) MaF8 3 9.5006e-2 (2.01e-2) # 8.6955e-2 (1.29e-2) # 1.3148e-1 (3.37e-2) # 2.9967e-1 (2.41e-1) # 1.9169e-1 (4.90e-2) # 7.8517e-2 (1.46e-2) MaF9 3 8.1383e-2 (2.71e-2) # 4.6689e-1 (2.05e-1) # 8.9195e-2 (2.26e-2) # 1.3979e-1 (5.23e-2) # 8.4144e-2 (2.14e-2) # 6.8064e-2 (7.43e-3) MaF10 3 3.3521e-1 (5.23e-2) # 2.4991e-1 (4.80e-2) ⇡ 4.3074e-1 (7.67e-2) # 5.7938e-1 (9.34e-2) # 3.9627e-1 (6.32e-2) # 2.2889e-1 (3.52e-2) MaF11 3 1.6268e-1 (1.30e-3) 2.3696e-1 (1.24e-2) # 1.6323e-1 (2.67e-3) 2.6705e-1 (6.22e-2) # 1.5653e-1 (1.51e-3) 1.7044e-1 (3.47e-3) MaF12 3 2.2402e-1 (3.35e-3) ⇡ 2.5115e-1 (6.79e-3) # 2.3015e-1 (2.12e-2) # 2.9391e-1 (2.51e-2) # 2.2429e-1 (2.05e-3) ⇡ 2.2441e-1 (2.47e-3) MaF13 3 9.0600e-2 (7.82e-3) # 1.7135e-1 (2.59e-2) # 9.4125e-2 (9.68e-3) # 1.1631e-1 (3.33e-2) # 9.2006e-2 (8.73e-3) # 7.9967e-2 (4.42e-3) MaF14 3 9.8537e-1 (3.06e-1) ⇡ 1.3652e+0 (4.70e-1) # 1.2546e+0 (4.14e-1) # 6.1995e-1 (1.38e-1) 1.2979e+0 (4.95e-1) # 9.3860e-1 (3.08e-1) MaF15 3 3.8100e-1 (7.39e-2) ⇡ 5.8612e-1 (8.08e-2) # 7.2037e-1 (2.10e-1) # 3.7313e-1 (9.47e-2) 9.0553e-1 (8.52e-2) # 4.2139e-1 (9.32e-2) MaF1 5 1.1596e-1 (1.05e-3) # 1.2184e-1 (2.19e-3) # 1.8400e-1 (9.92e-3) # 1.5437e-1 (5.43e-2) # 2.0875e-1 (5.47e-3) # 1.1017e-1 (1.61e-3) MaF2 5 9.4906e-2 (1.16e-3) # 1.0120e-1 (1.42e-3) # 1.1296e-1 (3.08e-3) # 1.1078e-1 (2.96e-4) # 1.2384e-1 (2.71e-3) # 9.2976e-2 (1.10e-3) MaF3 5 1.5533e-1 (3.23e-1) # 1.9521e+0 (4.31e+0) # 1.3713e+0 (2.89e+0) # 1.0495e-1 (6.18e-3) # 9.3684e-2 (4.50e-3) # 5.4560e-2 (8.97e-4) MaF4 5 2.2834e+0 (9.02e-2) # 2.3563e+0 (1.59e+0) ⇡ 3.0028e+0 (1.85e+0) # 1.1559e+1 (1.15e+0) # 2.8182e+0 (2.11e-1) # 1.8275e+0 (6.47e-2) MaF5 5 1.9730e+0 (4.94e-3) # 1.9916e+0 (8.98e-1) # 2.0382e+0 (3.00e-1) # 7.5844e+0 (1.89e+0) # 1.9662e+0 (6.12e-3) # 1.7508e+0 (2.64e-2) MaF6 5 2.0461e-3 (4.15e-5) 3.5892e-2 (8.23e-4) # 1.6904e-2 (2.95e-3) # 1.1807e-1 (1.69e-1) # 8.1549e-2 (1.09e-2) # 2.4664e-3 (5.74e-5) MaF7 5 2.5829e-1 (5.15e-3) ⇡ 2.3492e-1 (5.23e-3) 2.8437e-1 (5.73e-3) # 5.1550e-1 (2.40e-2) # 3.0107e-1 (2.50e-2) # 2.5782e-1 (1.72e-2) MaF8 Mean and St. Dev. of the IGD across 50 runs ↑ means better than, ↓ worst than, and ≈ equivalent to AGE-MOEA Problem M AR-MOEA GrEA NSGA-III MOEA/D -DEA AGE-MOEA MaF1 3 4.3854e-2 (5.49e-4) # 4.2393e-2 (8.39e-4) 6.1953e-2 (2.14e-3) # 7.0473e-2 (7.88e-6) # 8.0706e-2 (7.20e-4) # 4.3056e-2 (4.25e-4) MaF2 3 3.2100e-2 (7.71e-4) # 3.1930e-2 (4.52e-4) # 3.6179e-2 (8.14e-4) # 4.1280e-2 (1.37e-3) # 3.6522e-2 (3.46e-4) # 3.1031e-2 (6.56e-4) MaF3 3 1.5462e+0 (1.97e+0) # 9.9568e-1 (1.98e+0) # 2.3782e+0 (3.59e+0) # 3.1098e-1 (6.76e-1) 3.3974e+0 (5.63e+0) # 5.1510e-1 (1.41e+0) MaF4 3 1.2607e+0 (2.01e+0) # 1.3245e+0 (1.58e+0) # 3.1889e+0 (2.92e+0) # 2.1207e+0 (9.71e-1) # 1.4392e+0 (1.83e+0) # 7.5761e-1 (1.20e+0) MaF5 3 1.0265e+0 (1.27e+0) # 9.3317e-1 (1.02e+0) # 7.1456e-1 (1.00e+0) # 1.2690e+0 (1.43e+0) # 8.1065e-1 (7.54e-1) # 3.0978e-1 (3.24e-1) MaF6 3 5.1379e-3 (1.18e-4) 2.0989e-2 (5.84e-4) # 1.4955e-2 (1.60e-3) # 7.9072e-2 (1.26e-1) # 3.3136e-2 (2.58e-3) # 5.4330e-3 (1.12e-4) MaF7 3 1.9735e-1 (2.33e-1) # 8.6453e-2 (4.81e-3) 7.8716e-2 (3.87e-3) 1.7749e-1 (1.18e-1) # 1.0860e-1 (6.88e-2) # 9.1365e-2 (8.64e-2) MaF8 3 9.5006e-2 (2.01e-2) # 8.6955e-2 (1.29e-2) # 1.3148e-1 (3.37e-2) # 2.9967e-1 (2.41e-1) # 1.9169e-1 (4.90e-2) # 7.8517e-2 (1.46e-2) MaF9 3 8.1383e-2 (2.71e-2) # 4.6689e-1 (2.05e-1) # 8.9195e-2 (2.26e-2) # 1.3979e-1 (5.23e-2) # 8.4144e-2 (2.14e-2) # 6.8064e-2 (7.43e-3) MaF10 3 3.3521e-1 (5.23e-2) # 2.4991e-1 (4.80e-2) ⇡ 4.3074e-1 (7.67e-2) # 5.7938e-1 (9.34e-2) # 3.9627e-1 (6.32e-2) # 2.2889e-1 (3.52e-2) MaF11 3 1.6268e-1 (1.30e-3) 2.3696e-1 (1.24e-2) # 1.6323e-1 (2.67e-3) 2.6705e-1 (6.22e-2) # 1.5653e-1 (1.51e-3) 1.7044e-1 (3.47e-3) MaF12 3 2.2402e-1 (3.35e-3) ⇡ 2.5115e-1 (6.79e-3) # 2.3015e-1 (2.12e-2) # 2.9391e-1 (2.51e-2) # 2.2429e-1 (2.05e-3) ⇡ 2.2441e-1 (2.47e-3) MaF13 3 9.0600e-2 (7.82e-3) # 1.7135e-1 (2.59e-2) # 9.4125e-2 (9.68e-3) # 1.1631e-1 (3.33e-2) # 9.2006e-2 (8.73e-3) # 7.9967e-2 (4.42e-3) MaF14 3 9.8537e-1 (3.06e-1) ⇡ 1.3652e+0 (4.70e-1) # 1.2546e+0 (4.14e-1) # 6.1995e-1 (1.38e-1) 1.2979e+0 (4.95e-1) # 9.3860e-1 (3.08e-1) MaF15 3 3.8100e-1 (7.39e-2) ⇡ 5.8612e-1 (8.08e-2) # 7.2037e-1 (2.10e-1) # 3.7313e-1 (9.47e-2) 9.0553e-1 (8.52e-2) # 4.2139e-1 (9.32e-2) MaF1 5 1.1596e-1 (1.05e-3) # 1.2184e-1 (2.19e-3) # 1.8400e-1 (9.92e-3) # 1.5437e-1 (5.43e-2) # 2.0875e-1 (5.47e-3) # 1.1017e-1 (1.61e-3) MaF2 5 9.4906e-2 (1.16e-3) # 1.0120e-1 (1.42e-3) # 1.1296e-1 (3.08e-3) # 1.1078e-1 (2.96e-4) # 1.2384e-1 (2.71e-3) # 9.2976e-2 (1.10e-3) MaF3 5 1.5533e-1 (3.23e-1) # 1.9521e+0 (4.31e+0) # 1.3713e+0 (2.89e+0) # 1.0495e-1 (6.18e-3) # 9.3684e-2 (4.50e-3) # 5.4560e-2 (8.97e-4) MaF4 5 2.2834e+0 (9.02e-2) # 2.3563e+0 (1.59e+0) ⇡ 3.0028e+0 (1.85e+0) # 1.1559e+1 (1.15e+0) # 2.8182e+0 (2.11e-1) # 1.8275e+0 (6.47e-2) MaF5 5 1.9730e+0 (4.94e-3) # 1.9916e+0 (8.98e-1) # 2.0382e+0 (3.00e-1) # 7.5844e+0 (1.89e+0) # 1.9662e+0 (6.12e-3) # 1.7508e+0 (2.64e-2) MaF6 5 2.0461e-3 (4.15e-5) 3.5892e-2 (8.23e-4) # 1.6904e-2 (2.95e-3) # 1.1807e-1 (1.69e-1) # 8.1549e-2 (1.09e-2) # 2.4664e-3 (5.74e-5) MaF7 5 2.5829e-1 (5.15e-3) ⇡ 2.3492e-1 (5.23e-3) 2.8437e-1 (5.73e-3) # 5.1550e-1 (2.40e-2) # 3.0107e-1 (2.50e-2) # 2.5782e-1 (1.72e-2) MaF8 5 8.9355e-2 (2.23e-3) # 1.2940e-1 (5.50e-3) # 1.6331e-1 (7.80e-3) # 2.5847e-1 (6.81e-2) # 3.0528e-1 (3.94e-2) # 7.6191e-2 (6.97e-4) MaF9 5 8.8245e-2 (5.05e-3) ⇡ 1.1496e+0 (3.88e-1) # 3.5017e-1 (1.62e-1) # 1.3132e-1 (3.75e-2) # 6.7137e-1 (1.79e-1) # 8.8524e-2 (6.79e-3) MaF10 5 6.8772e-1 (5.42e-2) # 5.1743e-1 (2.38e-2) # 8.2837e-1 (6.74e-2) # 8.7736e-1 (5.15e-2) # 6.4136e-1 (6.88e-2) # 4.1464e-1 (2.49e-2) MaF11 5 3.9050e-1 (3.34e-3) # 4.9965e-1 (2.09e-2) # 3.8658e-1 (2.98e-3) ⇡ 7.7530e-1 (4.46e-2) # 3.8803e-1 (3.72e-3) ⇡ 3.8570e-1 (4.75e-3) MaF12 5 9.4651e-1 (4.83e-3) # 9.3832e-1 (6.53e-3) # 9.3385e-1 (5.03e-3) # 1.6205e+0 (1.04e-1) # 9.2941e-1 (3.69e-3) # 9.2122e-1 (5.03e-3) MaF13 5 9.5739e-2 (5.09e-3) # 3.8905e-1 (1.03e-1) # 1.7174e-1 (1.61e-2) # 1.6123e-1 (4.18e-2) # 2.9768e-1 (4.66e-2) # 8.9651e-2 (7.13e-3) MaF14 5 8.1409e-1 (2.57e-1) # 7.5450e-1 (1.48e-1) # 8.4358e-1 (1.95e-1) # 7.8806e-1 (2.35e-1) # 1.0024e+0 (4.03e-1) # 6.5343e-1 (1.41e-1) MaF15 5 5.6385e-1 (7.85e-2) 7.3806e-1 (5.00e-2) 1.2955e+0 (2.06e-1) # 6.3603e-1 (1.13e-1) 1.0880e+0 (1.09e-1) ⇡ 1.0901e+0 (2.33e-1) MaF1 10 2.2537e-1 (1.69e-3) 2.3703e-1 (6.26e-3) ⇡ 2.8389e-1 (5.74e-3) # 5.3403e-1 (2.47e-2) # 3.1707e-1 (7.43e-3) # 2.3803e-1 (5.36e-3) MaF2 10 1.8400e-1 (6.49e-3) # 3.6911e-1 (1.65e-2) # 2.0898e-1 (1.71e-2) # 2.6117e-1 (1.43e-3) # 1.9988e-1 (8.11e-3) # 1.7370e-1 (5.34e-3) MaF3 10 1.5649e+0 (5.04e+0) # 1.4697e+4 (1.69e+4) # 3.2428e+3 (6.34e+3) # 1.4320e-1 (2.11e-3) # 8.5241e+0 (2.40e+1) # 6.9331e-2 (1.01e-3) MaF4 10 9.5813e+1 (6.24e+0) # 1.6292e+2 (3.91e+1) # 9.4722e+1 (8.70e+0) # 5.3804e+2 (4.52e+1) # 1.1635e+2 (1.39e+1) # 5.7991e+1 (4.15e+0) MaF5 10 9.7353e+1 (5.14e+0) # 4.7038e+1 (1.05e+0) ⇡ 7.7391e+1 (1.23e+0) # 3.0165e+2 (2.68e+0) # 7.7560e+1 (7.13e-1) # 4.6762e+1 (1.57e+0) MaF6 10 3.4000e-1 (3.17e-1) ⇡ 8.6533e-1 (4.10e-1) # 6.1137e-1 (2.11e-1) # 1.1737e-1 (1.62e-1) 1.6267e-1 (2.56e-1) 3.5746e-1 (1.78e-1) MaF7 10 1.4115e+0 (8.58e-2) # 2.6086e+0 (6.41e-2) # 1.1407e+0 (7.72e-2) # 2.4215e+0 (5.00e-1) # 9.0120e-1 (4.96e-2) # 8.4737e-1 (9.93e-3)
  • 23. Results for M=10 !23 An Adaptive Evolutionary Algorithm based on Non-Euclidean Geometry GECCO ’19, July 13–17, 2019, Prague, Czech Republic Table 3: IGD values (mean and standard deviation) achieved by the AGE-MOEA and the baselines on the Maf benchmark [2] with M=3,5, and 10 objectives. Best performance is highlighted in grey color. Problem M AR-MOEA GrEA NSGA-III MOEA/D -DEA AGE-MOEA MaF1 3 4.3854e-2 (5.49e-4) # 4.2393e-2 (8.39e-4) 6.1953e-2 (2.14e-3) # 7.0473e-2 (7.88e-6) # 8.0706e-2 (7.20e-4) # 4.3056e-2 (4.25e-4) MaF2 3 3.2100e-2 (7.71e-4) # 3.1930e-2 (4.52e-4) # 3.6179e-2 (8.14e-4) # 4.1280e-2 (1.37e-3) # 3.6522e-2 (3.46e-4) # 3.1031e-2 (6.56e-4) MaF3 3 1.5462e+0 (1.97e+0) # 9.9568e-1 (1.98e+0) # 2.3782e+0 (3.59e+0) # 3.1098e-1 (6.76e-1) 3.3974e+0 (5.63e+0) # 5.1510e-1 (1.41e+0) MaF4 3 1.2607e+0 (2.01e+0) # 1.3245e+0 (1.58e+0) # 3.1889e+0 (2.92e+0) # 2.1207e+0 (9.71e-1) # 1.4392e+0 (1.83e+0) # 7.5761e-1 (1.20e+0) MaF5 3 1.0265e+0 (1.27e+0) # 9.3317e-1 (1.02e+0) # 7.1456e-1 (1.00e+0) # 1.2690e+0 (1.43e+0) # 8.1065e-1 (7.54e-1) # 3.0978e-1 (3.24e-1) MaF6 3 5.1379e-3 (1.18e-4) 2.0989e-2 (5.84e-4) # 1.4955e-2 (1.60e-3) # 7.9072e-2 (1.26e-1) # 3.3136e-2 (2.58e-3) # 5.4330e-3 (1.12e-4) MaF7 3 1.9735e-1 (2.33e-1) # 8.6453e-2 (4.81e-3) 7.8716e-2 (3.87e-3) 1.7749e-1 (1.18e-1) # 1.0860e-1 (6.88e-2) # 9.1365e-2 (8.64e-2) MaF8 3 9.5006e-2 (2.01e-2) # 8.6955e-2 (1.29e-2) # 1.3148e-1 (3.37e-2) # 2.9967e-1 (2.41e-1) # 1.9169e-1 (4.90e-2) # 7.8517e-2 (1.46e-2) MaF9 3 8.1383e-2 (2.71e-2) # 4.6689e-1 (2.05e-1) # 8.9195e-2 (2.26e-2) # 1.3979e-1 (5.23e-2) # 8.4144e-2 (2.14e-2) # 6.8064e-2 (7.43e-3) MaF10 3 3.3521e-1 (5.23e-2) # 2.4991e-1 (4.80e-2) ⇡ 4.3074e-1 (7.67e-2) # 5.7938e-1 (9.34e-2) # 3.9627e-1 (6.32e-2) # 2.2889e-1 (3.52e-2) MaF11 3 1.6268e-1 (1.30e-3) 2.3696e-1 (1.24e-2) # 1.6323e-1 (2.67e-3) 2.6705e-1 (6.22e-2) # 1.5653e-1 (1.51e-3) 1.7044e-1 (3.47e-3) MaF12 3 2.2402e-1 (3.35e-3) ⇡ 2.5115e-1 (6.79e-3) # 2.3015e-1 (2.12e-2) # 2.9391e-1 (2.51e-2) # 2.2429e-1 (2.05e-3) ⇡ 2.2441e-1 (2.47e-3) MaF13 3 9.0600e-2 (7.82e-3) # 1.7135e-1 (2.59e-2) # 9.4125e-2 (9.68e-3) # 1.1631e-1 (3.33e-2) # 9.2006e-2 (8.73e-3) # 7.9967e-2 (4.42e-3) MaF14 3 9.8537e-1 (3.06e-1) ⇡ 1.3652e+0 (4.70e-1) # 1.2546e+0 (4.14e-1) # 6.1995e-1 (1.38e-1) 1.2979e+0 (4.95e-1) # 9.3860e-1 (3.08e-1) MaF15 3 3.8100e-1 (7.39e-2) ⇡ 5.8612e-1 (8.08e-2) # 7.2037e-1 (2.10e-1) # 3.7313e-1 (9.47e-2) 9.0553e-1 (8.52e-2) # 4.2139e-1 (9.32e-2) MaF1 5 1.1596e-1 (1.05e-3) # 1.2184e-1 (2.19e-3) # 1.8400e-1 (9.92e-3) # 1.5437e-1 (5.43e-2) # 2.0875e-1 (5.47e-3) # 1.1017e-1 (1.61e-3) MaF2 5 9.4906e-2 (1.16e-3) # 1.0120e-1 (1.42e-3) # 1.1296e-1 (3.08e-3) # 1.1078e-1 (2.96e-4) # 1.2384e-1 (2.71e-3) # 9.2976e-2 (1.10e-3) MaF3 5 1.5533e-1 (3.23e-1) # 1.9521e+0 (4.31e+0) # 1.3713e+0 (2.89e+0) # 1.0495e-1 (6.18e-3) # 9.3684e-2 (4.50e-3) # 5.4560e-2 (8.97e-4) MaF4 5 2.2834e+0 (9.02e-2) # 2.3563e+0 (1.59e+0) ⇡ 3.0028e+0 (1.85e+0) # 1.1559e+1 (1.15e+0) # 2.8182e+0 (2.11e-1) # 1.8275e+0 (6.47e-2) MaF5 5 1.9730e+0 (4.94e-3) # 1.9916e+0 (8.98e-1) # 2.0382e+0 (3.00e-1) # 7.5844e+0 (1.89e+0) # 1.9662e+0 (6.12e-3) # 1.7508e+0 (2.64e-2) MaF6 5 2.0461e-3 (4.15e-5) 3.5892e-2 (8.23e-4) # 1.6904e-2 (2.95e-3) # 1.1807e-1 (1.69e-1) # 8.1549e-2 (1.09e-2) # 2.4664e-3 (5.74e-5) MaF7 5 2.5829e-1 (5.15e-3) ⇡ 2.3492e-1 (5.23e-3) 2.8437e-1 (5.73e-3) # 5.1550e-1 (2.40e-2) # 3.0107e-1 (2.50e-2) # 2.5782e-1 (1.72e-2) MaF8 Mean and St. Dev. of the IGD across 50 runs ↑ means better than, ↓ worst than, and ≈ equivalent to AGE-MOEA MaF15 3 3.8100e-1 (7.39e-2) ⇡ 5.8612e-1 (8.08e-2) # 7.2037e-1 (2.10e-1) # 3.7313e-1 (9.47e-2) 9.0553e-1 (8.52e-2) # 4.2139e-1 (9.32e-2) MaF1 5 1.1596e-1 (1.05e-3) # 1.2184e-1 (2.19e-3) # 1.8400e-1 (9.92e-3) # 1.5437e-1 (5.43e-2) # 2.0875e-1 (5.47e-3) # 1.1017e-1 (1.61e-3) MaF2 5 9.4906e-2 (1.16e-3) # 1.0120e-1 (1.42e-3) # 1.1296e-1 (3.08e-3) # 1.1078e-1 (2.96e-4) # 1.2384e-1 (2.71e-3) # 9.2976e-2 (1.10e-3) MaF3 5 1.5533e-1 (3.23e-1) # 1.9521e+0 (4.31e+0) # 1.3713e+0 (2.89e+0) # 1.0495e-1 (6.18e-3) # 9.3684e-2 (4.50e-3) # 5.4560e-2 (8.97e-4) MaF4 5 2.2834e+0 (9.02e-2) # 2.3563e+0 (1.59e+0) ⇡ 3.0028e+0 (1.85e+0) # 1.1559e+1 (1.15e+0) # 2.8182e+0 (2.11e-1) # 1.8275e+0 (6.47e-2) MaF5 5 1.9730e+0 (4.94e-3) # 1.9916e+0 (8.98e-1) # 2.0382e+0 (3.00e-1) # 7.5844e+0 (1.89e+0) # 1.9662e+0 (6.12e-3) # 1.7508e+0 (2.64e-2) MaF6 5 2.0461e-3 (4.15e-5) 3.5892e-2 (8.23e-4) # 1.6904e-2 (2.95e-3) # 1.1807e-1 (1.69e-1) # 8.1549e-2 (1.09e-2) # 2.4664e-3 (5.74e-5) MaF7 5 2.5829e-1 (5.15e-3) ⇡ 2.3492e-1 (5.23e-3) 2.8437e-1 (5.73e-3) # 5.1550e-1 (2.40e-2) # 3.0107e-1 (2.50e-2) # 2.5782e-1 (1.72e-2) MaF8 5 8.9355e-2 (2.23e-3) # 1.2940e-1 (5.50e-3) # 1.6331e-1 (7.80e-3) # 2.5847e-1 (6.81e-2) # 3.0528e-1 (3.94e-2) # 7.6191e-2 (6.97e-4) MaF9 5 8.8245e-2 (5.05e-3) ⇡ 1.1496e+0 (3.88e-1) # 3.5017e-1 (1.62e-1) # 1.3132e-1 (3.75e-2) # 6.7137e-1 (1.79e-1) # 8.8524e-2 (6.79e-3) MaF10 5 6.8772e-1 (5.42e-2) # 5.1743e-1 (2.38e-2) # 8.2837e-1 (6.74e-2) # 8.7736e-1 (5.15e-2) # 6.4136e-1 (6.88e-2) # 4.1464e-1 (2.49e-2) MaF11 5 3.9050e-1 (3.34e-3) # 4.9965e-1 (2.09e-2) # 3.8658e-1 (2.98e-3) ⇡ 7.7530e-1 (4.46e-2) # 3.8803e-1 (3.72e-3) ⇡ 3.8570e-1 (4.75e-3) MaF12 5 9.4651e-1 (4.83e-3) # 9.3832e-1 (6.53e-3) # 9.3385e-1 (5.03e-3) # 1.6205e+0 (1.04e-1) # 9.2941e-1 (3.69e-3) # 9.2122e-1 (5.03e-3) MaF13 5 9.5739e-2 (5.09e-3) # 3.8905e-1 (1.03e-1) # 1.7174e-1 (1.61e-2) # 1.6123e-1 (4.18e-2) # 2.9768e-1 (4.66e-2) # 8.9651e-2 (7.13e-3) MaF14 5 8.1409e-1 (2.57e-1) # 7.5450e-1 (1.48e-1) # 8.4358e-1 (1.95e-1) # 7.8806e-1 (2.35e-1) # 1.0024e+0 (4.03e-1) # 6.5343e-1 (1.41e-1) MaF15 5 5.6385e-1 (7.85e-2) 7.3806e-1 (5.00e-2) 1.2955e+0 (2.06e-1) # 6.3603e-1 (1.13e-1) 1.0880e+0 (1.09e-1) ⇡ 1.0901e+0 (2.33e-1) MaF1 10 2.2537e-1 (1.69e-3) 2.3703e-1 (6.26e-3) ⇡ 2.8389e-1 (5.74e-3) # 5.3403e-1 (2.47e-2) # 3.1707e-1 (7.43e-3) # 2.3803e-1 (5.36e-3) MaF2 10 1.8400e-1 (6.49e-3) # 3.6911e-1 (1.65e-2) # 2.0898e-1 (1.71e-2) # 2.6117e-1 (1.43e-3) # 1.9988e-1 (8.11e-3) # 1.7370e-1 (5.34e-3) MaF3 10 1.5649e+0 (5.04e+0) # 1.4697e+4 (1.69e+4) # 3.2428e+3 (6.34e+3) # 1.4320e-1 (2.11e-3) # 8.5241e+0 (2.40e+1) # 6.9331e-2 (1.01e-3) MaF4 10 9.5813e+1 (6.24e+0) # 1.6292e+2 (3.91e+1) # 9.4722e+1 (8.70e+0) # 5.3804e+2 (4.52e+1) # 1.1635e+2 (1.39e+1) # 5.7991e+1 (4.15e+0) MaF5 10 9.7353e+1 (5.14e+0) # 4.7038e+1 (1.05e+0) ⇡ 7.7391e+1 (1.23e+0) # 3.0165e+2 (2.68e+0) # 7.7560e+1 (7.13e-1) # 4.6762e+1 (1.57e+0) MaF6 10 3.4000e-1 (3.17e-1) ⇡ 8.6533e-1 (4.10e-1) # 6.1137e-1 (2.11e-1) # 1.1737e-1 (1.62e-1) 1.6267e-1 (2.56e-1) 3.5746e-1 (1.78e-1) MaF7 10 1.4115e+0 (8.58e-2) # 2.6086e+0 (6.41e-2) # 1.1407e+0 (7.72e-2) # 2.4215e+0 (5.00e-1) # 9.0120e-1 (4.96e-2) # 8.4737e-1 (9.93e-3) MaF8 10 1.2401e-1 (3.31e-3) # 1.4432e-1 (4.02e-3) # 2.7530e-1 (4.98e-2) # 9.6382e-1 (2.25e-2) # 7.5206e-1 (9.76e-2) # 1.0316e-1 (6.42e-4) MaF9 10 1.5808e-1 (7.75e-3) 1.4224e+0 (5.86e-2) # 4.4905e-1 (1.09e-1) # 1.3035e+0 (1.61e+0) # 7.8762e-1 (1.46e-1) # 2.9156e-1 (9.70e-3) MaF10 10 1.5107e+0 (1.01e-1) # 1.1179e+0 (4.06e-2) # 1.6448e+0 (1.35e-1) # 1.9093e+0 (1.39e-1) # 1.1739e+0 (8.54e-2) # 9.2879e-1 (1.74e-2) MaF11 10 9.9968e-1 (3.65e-2) # 1.1312e+0 (3.55e-2) # 1.2069e+0 (1.97e-1) # 1.9329e+0 (4.15e-2) # 1.1605e+0 (1.44e-1) # 9.7470e-1 (1.28e-2) MaF12 10 4.4564e+0 (2.82e-2) # 4.1458e+0 (4.01e-2) # 4.3421e+0 (7.55e-2) # 8.9572e+0 (1.64e-1) # 4.3330e+0 (3.25e-2) # 3.9226e+0 (2.99e-2) MaF13 10 1.1361e-1 (5.45e-3) # 4.4202e-1 (2.39e-1) # 2.2892e-1 (3.43e-2) # 9.4977e-1 (6.99e-2) # 5.6955e-1 (9.15e-2) # 9.6785e-2 (9.11e-3) MaF14 10 6.2926e-1 (4.32e-2) ⇡ 1.1096e+0 (2.47e-1) # 1.2089e+0 (3.12e-1) # 4.6465e-1 (1.04e-1) 1.0947e+0 (4.30e-1) # 6.1479e-1 (3.64e-2) MaF15 10 8.9098e-1 (1.31e-1) 1.3888e+0 (4.96e-1) ⇡ 1.3848e+0 (2.28e-1) # 1.0341e+0 (9.57e-2) ⇡ 1.2753e+0 (1.41e-1) # 1.0738e+0 (1.46e-1) f objectives. More specically, AGE-MOEA achieves signicantly etter IGD values in 12 problems (out of 15) for M=3, in 14 problems orm M=5, and in 12 problems for M=10. The largest dierence etween the two MOEAs is observed for the Maf6 test problem with M=5. The optimal Pareto front for Maf6 is concave (i.e., it has Concerning -DEA, we observe that AGE-MOEA outperforms -DEA in 13 out of 15 test problems for M=3 and M=15; and in 14 out of 15 test problems for M=10. Independently of the number of objectives M, there are six test problems for which the IGD values achieved by AGE-MOEA are at least one order of magnitude smaller than the
  • 24. AGE-MOEA Vs. GFM-MOEA !24 Hyperbolic Shifted Degenerate Irregular 1 100 MaF10 MaF3 MaF4 MaF8 Problems IGD Algorithms AGEMOEA GFMMOEA True PF for M=3 IGD values M=10, 50 runs Pop size = 275, #Gen = 300
  • 25. AGE-MOEA Vs. GFM-MOEA !25 100 MaF10 MaF3 MaF4 MaF8 Problems IGD Algorithms AGEMOEA GFMMOEA Running time (in s), 50 runs 10 1 100 MaF10 MaF3 MaF4 MaF8 Problems IGD Algorithms AGEMOEA GFMMOEA IGD values M=10, 50 runs Pop size = 275, #Gen = 300